Skip to main content

About your Search

20121205
20121213
SPONSOR
STATION
KQED (PBS) 38
LANGUAGE
English 38
Search Results 0 to 37 of about 38 (some duplicates have been removed)
PBS
Dec 10, 2012 7:00pm PST
house budget committee tells "nightly business report" he is optimistic about getting a fiscal cliff deal by the end of they year. maryland congressman chris van hollen talked with our darren gersh, and began with an update on the status of the talks. >> well, the good news is that the president and the speaker of the house are now in face-to-face discussions. it's always better to be talking than not. the other development is that increasingly congressional republicans recognize that the position that they had staked out is unsustainable. >> one of the arguments we hear from some democrats is that the fiscal cliff isn't really a cliff, it's more like a slope and you could gradually go down it and the withholding from tax wouldn't kick in for a while and the spending cuts wouldn't hurt the economy for a while. do you think it is good idea to go over the deliver and it is more of a slope. >> no, i think would be a mistake to go over the fiscal cliff because it could set in motion lots of things that could be a drag on the economy. that being said, i think if it's clear that the parties wer
PBS
Dec 12, 2012 1:00am PST
fiscal cliff standoff today. instead of holding dueling press conferences, republicans and democrats traded barbs on the house floor. >> where are the president's spending cuts? the longer the white house slow- walks this process, the closer our economy gets to the fiscal cliff. >> reporter: behind the scenes, progress is being made, but democrats are still arguing they've given ground in previous budget battles. that's one reason they are holding firm on higher taxes now. >> $1.6 trillion in cuts. "where are the cuts?" they are in bills that you, mr. speaker, have voted for. >> reporter: and there were new calls for more tax revenue today. warren buffett, vanguard founder john bogle, and financier george soros were among the famous names to call for a tougher estate tax. their proposal would exempt couples with up to $4 million in assets from the estate tax. above that level, estates would pay a 45% tax rate, rising to 50% or more on very large estates. supporters say that would both bring in badly needed revenue and help protect our democracy. >> it works to reduce concentrations o
PBS
Dec 7, 2012 1:00am PST
record nice numbers. this supposedly is fiscal cliff related selling as shareholders worries that capital gains tax rates will be higher next year. >> still, financial planner sharon appleman says selling stock solely for tax reasons isn't the best idea. >> i definitely think it's a legitimate concern and can be an opportunity. and i would say if somebody was interested in reducing a physician any-- position anyway, that can certainly be a great time to do it, you know, why pay higher taxes in a few months time when you can pay a lower tax now. >> reporter: and some analysts say, before unloading the shares, consider that fundamentals for apple haven't really changed. sure, revenue growth may slow and margins may contract, and there are worries the tech giant will have trouble fending off competition from increasingly popular android products. but, to some analysts, the shares look especially cheap today, especially considering their move south since the september high. >> we think the smart phone trend is still in the early to middle innings and is not in the late innings yet. so we thin
PBS
Dec 4, 2012 7:00pm PST
." >> susie: we turn tonight to other opinions on the fiscal cliff impasse. we talk with the chairman of the national governor's association, and we also hear from a leading advocate for responsible fiscal policy. we begin with governor jack markell, the democrat from delaware. he was one of six governors meeting with president obama today to talk about how the fiscal cliff impacts their states. i asked him what was his message to the president. >> our message was pretty straightforward. we believe that it is important that governors have a seat at the table as the president and leaders in congress are negotiating issues around the fiscal cliff. we think it is really important that they get something done because, obviously, if tax rates go up on middle-class americans come next month, it will be bad for those middle-class americans, it is will be bad for our states, and we're concerned about both the fiscal side and the economic growth side. >> susie: so talk to us a little bit about what kind of deal you would like to see. what were you proposing to the president? >> let's put it th
PBS
Dec 7, 2012 7:00pm PST
supposed to be weak due to worries about the fiscal cliff. with $600 billion in automatic tax hikes and government spending cuts set to start next year, why aren't more firms postponing hiring decisions? >> what we're hearing from businesses is that it is really hard to actually pull back hiring right now, because they've already fired so many workers, gotten so lean that it's really difficult. >> reporter: but not all the surprises in the report were good. at 7.7%, the unemployment rate hit its lowest level since december 2008. but that was mostly due to people giving up their search for work. and there's another disappointing trend, weak wage growth. >> what we are not seeing is strong income generation. the slowing in wage gains-- the weak bargaining power of labor comes across in this report and >> reporter: so although the labor market is not getting worse, it's not getting a lot better, either. and there are plenty of risks that could cause businesses to cancel projects, and hiring plans. >> clearly one of the biggest risks is that we don't see a deal on the fiscal cliff, or that
PBS
Dec 5, 2012 7:00pm PST
hiring may be short- lived, but experts worry fiscal cliff concerns could result in a new storm brewing for workers looking to land a job in the coming weeks. suzanne pratt, "n.b.r.," new york. >> tom: citi and the financials lead the way higher on wall street, helping the dow top 13,000 again. but a big drop in apple shares kept the nasdaq from gains. by the closing bell, the dow was up 82 points, the nasdaq down 23, the s&p added two points. >> susie: investors were also encouraged by news that american workers were very productive this past summer, and that's good news for company profits. productivity increased at its fastest pace in two years, at an annual rate of 2.9% from july through september. that number blows away the initial estimate of 1.9%. erika miller takes a closer look at how technology is helping to boost safety and productivity. >> reporter: three years ago, this long island hospital had a problem: healthcare workers weren't cleaning their hands as often as required. >> 100,000 people die each year in the united states from hospital acquired infections. that's more t
PBS
Dec 13, 2012 1:00am PST
most wants to get is a deal on the fiscal cliff that prevents the economy from falling back into recession, susie. >> susie: well, he better wish that again when he blows out the candles on his cake. at the present -- you know, i was struck by how much he talked about the fiscal cliff in very clear language, saying that it is a serious problem, it is already impacting the economy. and here is the important part: there is really nothing more the fed can do about it to offset going over the cliff. darren, you've been talking to so many lawmakers on the hill. do you think they're getting his message, and also in the white house as well? >> i really don't think so. i think they're aware that there are economic risks out there, but the battle between the president and the republican party and the speaker is kind of like that old saying about when elephants fight, the grass gets crushed. >> susie: i never heard that before. >> well, they're focused on the very big issue of tax rates, what the future of the fiscal policy of the country is. yes, they understand there are some economic ri
PBS
Dec 7, 2012 6:00pm PST
households. both numbers better than expected in the wake of hurricane sandy and fiscal cliff anxiety. >> so it looks like sandy will not affect the numbers even after revisions. >> reporter: georgetown's harry holzer, former chief economist for the labor department. >> in terms of the fiscal cliff, so far we are not seeing any big impact. >> reporter: not even an impact on retail which, for all the talk of online supplanting bricks-and-mortar buying, added 53,000 jobs last month-- much of it holiday hiring, no doubt-- but a healthy 140,000 overall increase in the past three months. not all the new numbers were festive, however. construction shed 20,000 jobs, though perhaps influenced by sandy. manufacturing dropped 7,000. grinchier still, job growth in september and october was revised down by 49,000 jobs. and for all the talk of a lower unemployment rate, its explanation seemed to be that several hundred thousand more americans stopped looking for work in november and were counted out of the labor force. again, economist holtzer. >> this month's change was driven completely by the f
PBS
Dec 10, 2012 6:00pm PST
public support for a fiscal cliff agreement. it came a day after he resumed talking with the top house republican, and as a year-end deadline moved even closer. the president took his public campaign for a deficit deal on his terms to the daimler diesel plant in redford michigan. >> if congress doesn't act soon meaning in the next few weeks, starting on january 1, everybody is going to see their income taxes go up. it's true. y'all don't like that? >> no! woodruff: instead, mr. obama again pressed for raising tax rates on the top two percent of incomes. >> and that's a principle i won't compromise on because i'm not going to have a situation where the wealthiest among us, including folks like me, get to keep all our tax breaks and then we're asking students to pay higher student loans. >> woodruff: his michigan visit came a day after the president and house speaker john boehner met privately at the white house. their first one-on-one session since the election. neither side gave any details about what was discussed. instead they issued identical statements saying that lines of co
PBS
Dec 7, 2012 4:00pm PST
fiscal cliff, how concerned are they about the ramifications? >> people around the world are concerned about it. it appears to be the case there was more concerned about the eurozone than the fiscal cliff. now things have changed and there is more concerned about the fiscal cliff. they asked about a resolution. >> what could the impact speed? we are looking at a time when the global recovery is fragile at best. >> of u.s. is 20% of the global economy. if the u.s. suffers as a result of a fiscal cliff, a complete wiping out of its growth is going to have repercussions around the world. probably half of that. if the u.s. economy has less growth, it will probably be 1% less in mexico, canada, probably less so in europe and japan. but there will be a ripple effects. >> are you worried about it? >> yes. of course i worry about it. the u.s. is a big chunk of the global economy. it has often been a driver of growth. and to have that player virtually flat, if not in recession, would be bad news for the rest of the world. we do not need that because recovery is fragile. we do not want to have t
PBS
Dec 12, 2012 3:00pm PST
they have to see what happens in terms of the fiscal cliff negotiations. their hope is that those will end with a deal between congress and the president and that will make way for a steady improvement in the economy. those are the things that they will monitor to see when is the time that they can ease back. >> sreenivasan: greg ip from the "economist," thank you so much for your time. >> thank you. >> sreenivasan: wall street initially rallied on the fed's pronouncement, but the enthusiasm quickly flagged and stocks gave up the gains. in the end, the dow jones industrial average lost three points to close at 13,245. the nasdaq fell eight points to close at 3,013. indianapolis will be the first major american city to replace all city-owned cars with electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles. the program announced today calls for completing the switch by 2025. the city also plans to phase in fire trucks and other heavy vehicles that run on compressed natural gas. officials said they're asking auto makers to create plug-in hybrid police cars, which don't yet exist. retiring u.s. senator
PBS
Dec 5, 2012 6:00pm PST
the standoff over the fiscal cliff. kwame holman updates the state of the negotiations and we talk with tennessee republican senator bob corker. >> ifill: jeffrey brown examines new concerns over syria's chemical weapons capability and what, if anything, the u.s. can do about it. >> woodruff: from florida, hari sreenivasan has the story of endangered coral reefs. many of them dying because ocean temperatures are rising and the waters are more acidic. >> i remember seeing fields of elk horn coral that you couldn't see through it and you couldn't see beyond it and those same areas are dead you know 99% dead. ♪ >> ifill: and we close with a remembrance of jazz great dave brubeck who died today, one day shy of his 92nd birthday. >> woodruff: that's all ahead on tonight's newshour. major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: and with the ongoing support of these institutions and foundations. and... this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. >> ifill: the nation's thi
PBS
Dec 6, 2012 12:00pm PST
lawmaker to reach a deal before the fiscal cliff deadline. the whitehouse open sists tax rates must rise on higher incomes in order to balance spending cuts but republican leadership remains committed to extending the bush tax cuts for all a tax bracket. brainer offer his response to the president. in an interview with julianna goldman of bloomberg news obama called the boehner plan quote out of balance. >> i think that we have the potential of getting a deal done, but it's going to require what i talked about during the campaign which is a balanced responsible approach to deficit reduction that can help give businesses certainty and make sure that the country grows. and unfortunately the speaker's proposal right now is still out of balance. he talks for example about $800 billion worth of revenues but he says he's going to do that by lowering rates. when you look at the math, it doesn't work. >> rose: and here is the president talking about why it's essential for him that there be tax increases for the most wealthy among us. >> i don't think that the issue right now has to do with
PBS
Dec 4, 2012 6:00pm PST
cairo today. >> ifill: we continue our series of conversations about the fiscal cliff. tonight we hear from economist paul krugman. >> i don't think there's going to be much of a deal. i think there's going to be a kind of... there will be an outcome. >> woodruff: from haiti, fred de sam lazaro reports on the efforts to stem a deadly cholera epidemic that began after the 2010 earthquake. >> ifill: and ray suarez talks to author and journalist tom ricks about what he describes as the decline of american military leadership. >> today nobody gets credit for anything and mediocrity is accepted as a core value in the performance of generals. >> ifill: that's all ahead on tonight's newshour. major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: moving our economy for 160 years. bnsf, the engine that connects us. >> and by the bill and melinda gates foundation. dedicated to the idea that all people deserve the chance to live a healthy, productive life. and with the ongoing support of these institutions and foundations. and... this program was made possible by the corporation for public bro
PBS
Dec 9, 2012 3:30pm PST
automatic spending cuts. the phenomenon known as the fiscal cliff. if that happens, it will trigger a recession, or worse. so, president obama is taking action and insisting that republicans agree to increase the existing marginal tax rates on the wealthiest top 2% of u.s. taxpayers. and of course, there is more to the deal. but there will be no negotiations on that big part of the deal unless that tax on the wealthiest 2% is negotiated now. the president could not be more emphatic in stressing the indispensable element of surmounting the cliff is that super-rich revenue. >> we're not insisting on rates just out of spite. or out of any kind of partisan bickering. but rather because we need to raise a certain amount of revenue. >> okay. here is john boehner, the republican house speaker. >> if you look at the plans that the white house have talked about thus far, they couldn't pass either house of the congress. >> republicans proposed raising $800 billion in extra revenues. and that revenue should come through tax reform and closing loopholes. happy new year. question, patrick, looking
PBS
Dec 9, 2012 5:00pm PST
the mantra "fiscal cliff, fiscal cliff, fiscal cliff" is played out every night on the evening news and the corporate news. what does that say to you? that you'd get "fiscal cliff, fiscal cliff," but not "job crisis, job crisis, job crisis"? >> it tells me, quite frankly, that many of these people, who by the way did not have much to say about the deficit when we went to war in iraq and afghanistan and didn't pay for it, i didn't hear from any people in the media complaining about that. what it tells me is that behind the corporate drive for deficit reduction is a significant effort to try to cut social security, medicare, and medicaid and other programs that working families need, not so much because of deficit reduction, because this has been the agenda of republicans and right wingers for a very long time. >> so how do you see this fiscal debate playing out in the next couple of weeks? >> we have, those of us who say that deficit reduction is a serious issue, i believe it is. but believe very strongly that at a time when we have the most unequal distribution of wealth and income
PBS
Dec 7, 2012 7:30pm PST
the fiscal cliff. >> we're cutting on the order in $100 billion in government expenditures. >> reporter: khan started out teaching his cousin math over a we cam. when he posted his videos on youtube, they caught on like wildfire. khan quit his job at a hedge fund and began creating lessons in earnest from his closet. today, the khan academy boasts a full staff. universities like m.i.t. and stanford and for-profit companies like corsara and udacity have jumped into the mix with their own online classes. >> what's exciting about online learning is it's not your -- there's not a competition between the intellectual and your everyday life. they can happen at the same time. >> reporter: khan's vision, anyone can watch his videos anywhere for free at their own pace. his program, and ideas, are now being used by school districts from east palo alto to los angeles. you specialize in online lessons, so people might find it surprising that you're partnering with brick and mortar schools. why did you decide to do that? >> i have young children, and my personal -- i want them to go to
PBS
Dec 8, 2012 1:30am PST
on a mission to bring a free world class education to anyone, anywhere. >> it's really about the student taking ownership of their own learning. >> coming up next. >>> good evening. welcome to "this week in northern california." big news today from the u.s. supreme court on gay marriage. before we get to our other topics, we'll briefly discuss that with our panelists. joining me tonight are jill tucker, "san francisco chronicle" education reporter. matthai kuruvila, also with the "san francisco chronicle." and paul rogers with "san jose mercury news." the high court announced it will review proposition 8, california's ban on same-sex marriage and the federal defense of marriage act. paul, we'll begin with you. what can we infer from this? what's the time frame? can we expect any sweeping judgments? >> well, a timeframe is the arguments are going to happen in march then we expect a decision by the end of the court session which is june 27th. it will probably go right to the very end. as for how sweeping and how big of a decision we can expect, that's sort of the $64,000 question that court watchers were already speculating about today. are we going to get a narrow ruling one way or another on either one of these two cases or is it going to be one of those once in a generation social civil rights type cases like roe v. wade or brown v.s. board of education? and i think nobody knows. >> how much attention do you think they give to that, to public opinion? where the public stands on an issue? and growing sentiment? >> it's a great question. i mean, if you look at the evolving public opinion on this, there were polls in 2004 that were taken by gallup and "washington post" and other people that showed about 60% of the public opposed same-sex marria marriage. gallup had a poll out that showed 53% support and about 40% oppose. there are measures on state ballots around the country last month, and all for of them, the same-sex marriage side won. so the justices can see the trend. in that gallup poll, more than 70% of young people support same-sex marriage. the question is, do they see themselves stopping something they think is moving too fast? or do they want to make sure they're not behind the curve of history? >> well, it's clear that the people that were against gay marriage, they were happy about this today. even though it does have the potential for creating this nationwide ruling that allows gay marriage. i think we're up to how many states? about nine states and washington, d.c. so there's definitely a lot of states out there that are going to be paying attention. >> on the other hand, we have 31 states, i believe, that have a ban in place. this is going to be a very closely watched decision. closely watched situation. no decision yet until june. but, you know, we also have some other big local news as well. that was the big national news today. but in local news, the oakland police department has for the past decade been under court order to make reforms. it stems from a high-profile misconduct lawsuit involving a group of cops known as the riders. now city leaders are hoping a last-minute tentative deal will avoid a federal takeover of the department. matthai kuruvila, i know you've been covering this story. what are the details of this settlement and what does it mean for the department? >> well, what this agreement involves is an agreement between the police union, the city and professors attorneys who filed this original civil rights lawsuit. what they've decided on is creating a compliance director. now, this would be a quasi mayor of oakland in a sense in that he gets to -- he or she would have the power to fire the police chief with the court approval. they would have the power to direct the city administrators. those are two things currently only the mayor has. it's limited in scope in that it would only effect the reform tasks that aef incomplete for the police department. the city had been very concerned that this potential receiver, or federal receiver, would have oversight over the entire police department. so all -- so all three sides involved in this are very happy. >> and this whole situation stems from the riders case. remind us, again, what that was. that was a police brutality case. >> yeah. there were some officers who were accused of framing suspects and in the wake of that, there was millions of dollars paid out in civil lawsuits, but also this agreement on reforms that laid out various tasks the department had to comply with. there aren't a variety of different issues, but there are things like whenever somebody is stopped, a police officer has to mark down what was the reason why they were stopped and what was the outcome? now, that seems really simple, but failure to do that very thing is one of the remaining tasks that is threatening the department. >> you know, matthai, this was interesting because it was very important in oakland. people have been watching this. you know, whether a receiver would come in and take over, it would have been unprecedented to have that happen. at the same time, what they're addressing, not to minimize civil rights issues, but it's not at the top of the list of the people in oakland where they're seeing crime rates rise and seeing fewer policemen on the streets. just to be clear, this has nothing to do with that. this isn't going to put more police on the streets or address the rising level of crime. at least directly. >> it won't directly address rising crime. that's correct. but what advocates would say is improving the relationship between the community and the police department is critical to improving crime. so overwhelmingly the communities that oakland police interact with our latino and black and trust with with those communities is not great in many neighborhoods. and so these reform efforts are critical, professors attorneys would say, to improving those relationships. at the same time, we're talking about a huge cost. the city has already budgeted $5 million to deal with costs related to the reforms. $5 million would pay for 30 more officers on the streets of oakland, where crime has risen 23%. arrests are down 44% over 3 years. >> what i'm wondering about is everyone happy with this decision? it's unprecedented for a city, a police department to agree to a court-appointed director like this. >> that's correct. nobody knows of any department in the nation where an outsider, a court will have such authority over city spending. this compliance director can spend $250,000 at a time. so, but the city is happy because the scope is limited. they're just addressing the reforms. the police union is happy because they were worried that a receiver could effect union contracts and collective bargaining. they now have a seat at the table. plaintiffs attorneys are happy because now they have an enforcer within the department who will make sure these reforms go forward. before plaintiffs attorneys would give advice. they would suggest solutions but they didn't have any way to make this happen. this gives each of the three groups a piece. >> a say in the matter. so what happens next? a hearing on thursday. >> yeah. >> with judge henderson. >> yes. >> and at that point he'll decide whether to approve the settlement or do something else? >> what city officials expect is at this hearing on thursday that that's what the judge will consider. is the settlement. >> how long to they think the receiver will be around? >> at least a year. >> at least a year. all right. matthai, thank you. we'll stay on it and be at the hearing on thursday. thank you so much. >>> well, moving from crime to education, major plans are in the works to make california schools more green. it's all made possible by voters who passed proposition 39 last month. it's expected to generate billions of dollars. it closes a tax loophole for out of state corporations and requires that half the money be spent on improving energy efficiency in schools and public buildings. and paul rogers, what kind of improvements would be made to the schools and what would this mean to them? >> these are the kind of things that aren't particularly sexy, like when you see people hold press conferences because they put big new solar rays on school buildings and things. this is much more mundane stuff. like new insulation, double-pain windows, switches so the lights go out when you go out of the building. what's interesting, if you talk to engineers and energy experts who really study this stuff is you get a lot more bang for your buck when you spend those bucks doing energy efficiency rather than doing these big elaborate renewable projects. you know, it doesn't make sense to take a school building which is old with drafty windows and put $1 million solar ray on the top. whatever electricity you generate, you're then going to basically waste because you're leaking power out the windows. and i would just say the prop 39 is the most important ballot question on california's ballot that nobody paid attention to. it passed by 20 points. most people couldn't explain what it did. this money is putting in $2.75 billion in new money over the next 5 years to retrofit school buildings. that is as much money, nearly, as the stem cell bond that we did in 2004 which was $3 billion. arnold schwarzenegger's million solar roofs which was $3 billion. nothing like it has ever been done on this scale in any state in the country. >> let me ask you this. how much of california's schools currently spending on energy costs and how much will this likely save them in the long run? >> again, it's a huge number. california schools spend more money an utility bills than any other cost other than the labor costs that they're paying teachers and other officials. and nationwide, we spend $8 billion with a "b" on utilities at public skpochools, so if youn save 28% on your pg&e bill which is easy, nationwide that is a $2 billion savings. >> that's serious money. >> that would buy 40 million new texbooks. the thing is, not only that, when you make that savings, the schools see their power bills go down, they can then spend that extra money on the schools. and so a billionaire hedge fund manager here in san francisco to put up $30 million to bankroll this is interested in the math of energy efficiency. a lot of money to engineers at stanford to study it. he believes it's a double-edged win that you save money for the schools, giving them more money, but you also reduce smog and greenhouse gases because you're burning less fossil fuel to heat or cool the schools. >> you know, i will say the schools, in talking to my sources in oakland and san francisco, for example, they are very excited about this money. don't, you know, do not misunderstand that at all. they would love to see this money flowing into their schools. i think what i'm hearing from them, though, and what the critics with were saying earlier, number one, how is the money going to get to them and what is it going to pay for? the reality is, there are competitive grants, talking about things like that. it's the legislator and the governor who gets to direct this money. it isn't just free money that the schools get. i think they're a little concerned about bickering and arguing about who gets that money, you know, how much power the union will have in directing that money. you know, can it go to training? can it go -- >> it's a ton of money, and the approval rating of the legislature is 10%. so this week, two legislators, nancy skinner from oakland, assemblywoman, and state senator kevin dalion from l.a. introduced bills on specifically how to spend the money. there are general parameters in the measure which basely says spend it retrofitting schools and other public buildings and do job training for people or all of the above, installing energy efficiency measures. so what their bills are going to do is say essentially give all the money to schools for retrofits and have one agency, the state general services administration, set up competitive grant programs. so there's 10,000 public schools in california. if you spend $500,000 per school, you can do half of all the schools in california. 5,000 schools over the next 5 years. then the program sunsets so it's not a perpetual bureaucracy. now, legislature might end up wasting it all, but, you know, there's at least some checks and balances. audits and things like that. >> overall, sorry, excuse me, overall a big win. >> well, it depends. some people were opposed to this. there were a lot of folks, silicon valley leadership groups a business group, george schultz, former republican secretary of state, others who supported this. so it wasn't too partisan. it's a basic question of math. got to ask people, do you have insulation in your attic? if so, why? and it doesn't matter if you believe in global warming or r not. why do you have insulation in your attic? it's to save money. >> definitely a step forward in greening california schools. thank you. >> no question. >> okay. >>> something else we want to talk about, an interesting study that came out. one in four young boys of color expects to fail in school by the time he reaches kindergarten. that's just one of the many troubling findings of the study by a state assembly committee. jill tucker, you've been following this. what are some of the other alarming findings in that study? >> you know, it starts with a very simple statistic, actually. that 70% of those under 25 in california identify as a person of color. so our young population is not prominently white, and yet these are the students, these are the children that are more likely to fail. so it's an economic issue for the state and it's a real problem in terms of looking at the future of our economy. but some of the other statistics when you look at that is that 55% of latino boys and 54% of african-american boys graduate on time. so you start harkening back to that 70% figure and then doing the math. one-sixth of african-american males between the ages of 16 and 25 are either out of work, out of school, or in jail. >> what are some of the reasons for that? did the study look at that? >> they did. you know, poverty is a big factor. many of these children experience huge amounts and repetitive amounts of trauma. and i can hear the viewers out there. i can hear them yelling into their tv set that it's parenting. right? it's the absent fathers, it's the absent parent in general and that -- those caring environments. but i think what this study is doing is it's really looking at what the reality is. the causes are a problem. poverty, trauma. fixing those is difficult. you have to lower crime, right? you have to get people jobs so that they get out of poverty. but what this report is looking at very specifically is a small subset of our society. young men and boys of color. specifically. and what they -- what their circumstances are, what their status is, and what it is that the legislature, communities, schools, our health system need to do to address the issues that these men and boys are facing. >> because when they suffer, it really affects all of us in terms of long-term productivity, the kinds of state services they need. local services. and we all fund that as taxpayers. i think we all have a stake. did the study talk about any possible solutions? are there any models that they cite as good examples of programs for young people? >> they cited programs across the state. many of them actually in the bay area and specifically in oakland where oakland is already addressing, especially the school system, looking at this as a holistic issue basing them. they're focusing very specifically on african-american boys and they've created the office of african-american male achievement. and they are looking at health care, trauma treatment, mentoring, manhood development classes. and they're doing everything from bringing health clinics from children's hospital into the schools to teaching these young men how to tie ties. so it is a vast system. these are the types of programs that they're trying to push either legislatively or through community programs. >> and this is a shift in how we've looked at the achievement gap. >> you know, this really is a report, because it's looking at this issue from a different perspective. we've talked about the achievement gap over and over again. this really is looking at a specific gender and to a certain degree a specific race. >> all right. jill, thank you very much for the update on that. >>> something else we want to tell you about. a new study by the u.s. department of education paints a pretty bleak picture of california's high schools. only 76% of the state students actually graduate. that puts california at 32nd in the entire nation. pretty low. i recently met with an education pioneer who hopes to change how young people learn, a click at a time. 6 million students around the world and counting know his voice and drawing style. >> if you get two green marbles then you are going to win. >> reporter: but not everyone knows his face. sal khan is the founder of the khan academy and the man behind simple but effective video lessons about a wide range of topics, like the fiscal cliff. >> we're cutting on the order in $100 billion in government expenditures. >> reporter: khan started out teaching his cousin math over a we cam. when he posted his videos on youtube, they caught on like wildfire. khan quit his job at a hedge fund and began creating lessons in earnest from his closet. today, the khan academy boasts a full staff. universities like m.i.t. and stanford and for-profit companies like corsara and udacity have jumped into the mix with their own online classes. >> what's exciting about online learning is it's not your -- there's not a competition between the intellectual and your everyday life. they can happen at the same time. >> reporter: khan's vision, anyone can watch his videos anywhere for free at their own pace. his program, and ideas, are now being used by school districts from east palo alto to los angeles. you specialize in online lessons, so people might find it surprising that you're partnering with brick and mortar schools. why did you decide to do that? >> i have young children, and my personal -- i want them to go to a physical school. i think the physical school is a very important part of someone's education. now, when they go to that physical school, what they do, in my ideal world might be different than the schools you and i grew up in. i don't want my children to go to a school where they are all learning at the same pace. i don't want them to go to a school where they have a weakness and concept, have to be on an exam, or see on an exam when adding fractions and the whole class moves on. >> is that your criticism of the way traditional education works today that everyone is stuck in the same mode regardle lesless whether they're learning at a different pace? >> the schools you and i went to, you take a math exam and get b-plus, that's considered a good grade. that means you had gaps in your knowledge, in something foundational like adding negative numbers or multiplying fractions. then later that gap is only going to grow and grow and grow. by the time you get to algebra, you're going to have trouble doing algebra because you didn't know your prealgebra work. >> in california, where there's bad funding problems, large population of limited english speakers. how do online lessons address that? >> we've actually translated our entire library of videos into spanish, portuguese, hindi, russian, arabic. i could keep going down and down the list. we have a lot more to do to localize the site. we are seeing teachers throughout the state, throughout the country, throughout the world saying at minimum, look, here's our resource. your parents can't afford tutoring, this is free. >> you have a new book "the one world schoolhouse." you write about your vision for the future of education. can you paint that picture for us? >> have multiple teachers working together, have multiage classrooms. i imagine a classroom looking like our office here, an open inspirational space. students all have their own goals. they have mentor, teachers who can help them achieve those goals. it's the student taking ownership of their own learning. >> you're part of a growing tri trend. online universities are growing. ivy league universities are getting in on the act. universities such as harvard and m.i.t. are offering their courses, some of them online for free. of course, there's the for-profit online yustuniversit. what do you think of this trend? >> broadly speaking, the trend is a huge positive. all of these players, m.i.t., harvard, some of the things going on in stanford and other places, they're putting knowledge out there for free. core to our mission. our mission is a free world class education for anyone, anywhere. these other placers are helping us push that mission forward. and so the missing piece, the piece that will really allow the con academies or m.i.t.s of the world to really thrive is to get to a confidence-based system, if i learned algebra on con academy or learned it through apprenticeship or high school, i can prove it to the world, hey, i know algebra and the world will recognize that. >> is there a downside to the trend? that's all well and good for the online universities and big name universities, ivy league schools because they're so famous. what happens to the medium sized less prestigious middle ground universities? do they disappear? >> i think the middle will have to introspect. i think it will be very healthy. we all know what's going on right now. we are telling students of all demographics, you should go to college. that is your ticket to a real career. come out on the other side and oftentimes you might have trouble getting a job. you see that in the unemployment numbers. they're disproportionately high from new college grads and saddled with debt that can't be canceled from bankruptcy. >> does any systemized education make sense anymore? you have a lot of young people who feel inspired by college dropouts, bill gates, mark zuckerberg, steve jobs. they did pretty well. >> yes, well, for any of them who will cite those examples i would encourage them to watch the probability videos. >> very low probability of that happening to them. >> lebron james, too, and others. i, you know, those are good examples, and i would be happy if my children became internet billionaires. but that's not a career track that we can all depend on. what i think is exciting about the next five years, the next ten years, next 30 years, is there's going to be much more variety in how people can learn and how people can get credentials. in the last 100 years or 200 years there was only one way to do it. go to a four-year institution, t go to a community college, pay a lot of tuition, get a bachelor's of science, bachelor's of art. they could choose that path, they could choose that path and apprenticeship. could do just an apprenticeship. apprenticeship plus online learning. it will be up to them to decide what fits their needs best and prove it to the job market or prove it to a graduate school that they're ready for that or a potential spouse. i actually think online is going to be much more in line with actually having people learn their whole life as opposed to our current model where most people stop in their early 20s. >> online education is here to stay for a while. so is the c khan academy. thanks for joining us. >> thanks for having me. >> read more about the khan academy in sal khan's new book "the one world schoolhouse." i want to thank all of our guests for being here tonight. visit kqed.org/thisweek for archives of the show. to subscribe to the newsletter and pod cast and share your thoughts and story ideas. >>> and in closing tonight we'd like to take just a moment to remember concord born jazz legend dave brubeck. he died wednesday morning one day before his 92nd birthday. in this documentary, brubeck plays a song he dead kadicated s wife, iola. ♪ >> dave brubeck, a legend who always proudly calls the bay area home. that does it for us. thank you for watching. have a good night and a great weekend. ♪ ♪ gwen: cliff diving, in front of the cameras and behind the scenes. plus, tea party politics and the deepening crisis in syria. tonight on "washington week." the president and the speaker square off at the edge of the fiscal cliff. >> that is a bad strategy for america, it's a bad strategy for your businesses, and it is not a game that i will play. >> the president has adopted a deliberate strategy to slow walk our economy right to the edge of deliberate strategy to slow walk our economy right to the edge of the fiscal cliff.
PBS
Dec 13, 2012 3:00pm PST
andrew kohut explains the latest poll numbers, showing strong support for the way president obama is handling the negotiations. >> the democrats are better regarded in this negotiation than the republicans by a lot. >> warner: plus ray >> warner: plus, ray suarez gets two views on proposals to raise the age of eligibility for medicare to 67, from 65. >> woodruff: it's bottoms up tonight for miles o'brien who reports on genetic links to alcoholism and other addictions. >> so far as i know, there's no law against reporting under the influence, so here goes something. >> warner: and we talk with ambassador marc grossman about prospects for afghanistan as the u.s. prepares to withdraw troops by 2014 and as he leaves his post as u.s. special envoy to the region. >> woodruff: that's all ahead on tonight's "newshour." >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: ♪ ♪ moving our economy for 160 years. bnsf, the engine that connects us. >> and by the alfred p. sloan foundation. supporting science, technology, and improved economic performance and financial literacy in the 21st century. >> and with the ongoing support of these institutions and foundations. and... >> this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. >> woodruff: violence continued across syria today as the united states welcomed a russian admission that syria's rebels may succeed in overthrowing president bashar al-assad. we may have a problem with that tape and we apologize. we'll try and get it together. if we're not able to -- we're going to go ahead and interview right now mr. vitaly churkin. he is russia's ambassador to the united nations. thank you for joining us. let me begin by asking you about the comment today made by your deputy foreign minister mr. bog don november. he said today "it is impossible to exclude a victory of the syrian opposition." how would you describe the situation in syria? >> well, you know i think he went on saying that the syrian government seems to be losing ground in the fighting with the opposition and i think this is obvious. but i don't think there is anything in that statement which one can welcome or not welcome. first of all, that doesn't mean that the trouble will end any time soon. the fighting may continue for a very long time still and the battle may keep going this way or the other way for a long time because you will recall when the crisis started the predictions were that it will last for two to four months and president assad is going to be toppled but that did not happen. another important thing to remember is that even if the current stage of the crisis were to end in the so-called victory of the opposition that would mean that real trouble in syria will only be starting you will recall that after saddam hussein was top. ed in iraq it was only the beginning of years of civil conflict and sectarian conflict in iraq which took over 100,000 lives of civilians. so something of this sort could well be happening in syria even after the so-called victory of the opposition. my point is that a political outcome, a political deal continues to be urgently needed in the situation in syria. >> woodruff: urgently needed. so does that mean that russia is now prepared to sit down and work toward a resolution that would involve different leadership? syria? >> russia has always maintained that. it's for the syrians themselves to decide who is going to lead the country and the syrian people. but russia has always been prepared to work for a political outcome. in fact, we were instrumental in putting together the geneva communication in the actions of the meeting with the foreign minister and participation of kofi annan who was the secretary general's special envoy which provides for the steps which are necessary in order to have a political conclusion to the crisis in syria. we agreed just recently with americans in a meeting with mr. brahimi participated in and mr. burns from the u.s. state department that they continue to be the only consensus realistic basis for a political outcome. so this is our platform. >> woodruff: let me ask you, mr. ambassador. if you're saying it's up to the syrians, isn't that really saying we just let the two sides continue to fight it out no matter what the cost in lives is? what is it, 40,000 syrians have already died? two million have been displaced. a half million refugees. >> what we're saying is completely the opposite. the goals should be putting together a national transitional body composed of representatives from the government and the opposition which are acceptable to each other sometimes the future or the stepping down from office of president assad is put to the floor. when people very often say that first he needs to step down then our question is but he is not stepping down so what are you going to do about it. if we were to accept that, what would change? if he continues to be in damascus and continues to be the leader of an important group of the syrian population at least and the leader of the armed forces. so that kind of logic would immediately put that strategy into an impasse and in fact it would only limit this -- the possibility would be to fight it out and this has been what's happening so our logic is that we should not put the assad future to the fore. we should try to find common ground politically and in terms of personalities who could be in that transitional body between various groups of syrians. >> woodruff: but my question remains, as long as there's a delay in waiting for that to happen, one side doesn't want to sit on the table with another side, there's discussion about whether iran would be at the table, the shape of the negotiations. meanwhile, people are dying in syria, so the question is -- >> you're exactly right. yes. this is absolutely the core of the problem that on both sides they seem to believe that they can win by fighting and the idea of the geneva communique sch we still continue to believe is an important document which we need to work on the basis on is that they all should stop fighting and sit together and determine who is gong to be the transitional body which will take them to the next stage of their political development >> to understand completely mr. ambassador, you're saying russia's position on syria, your support for president assad is as strong as it always has been. you're saying nothing has changed? >> we are not supporting president assad. we're supporting a political arrangement which needs to be found there we are against trying to resolve the conflict militarily. we think that the effort to make one side the victim militarily in the conflict to try to top it will government and the entire political system chp is represented by force is the root cause of this entire problem. we're not supporting assad. we're supporting the political outcome. the problem is that assad is there. you can say you should go as many times as you want but as long as he shows no intention of doing so, that would only leave you at the corner. >> woodruff: and just quickly. to those who look at the situation and say russia is one of the obstacles to finding a solution because you will not go your country will not go along with the sanctions required to make an important diplomatic change there. >> no, it would be completely irrelevant. the government has been fighting a war which has been very difficult for the government and is not exactly winning, to put it mildly so that's completely irrelevant. what we need is to put political pressure on both sides and to perceive those in their position who believe that the only way to win is to fight is a dangerous strategy. >> woodruff: finally, mr. ambassador, let me ask you about a development in the united states today i'm sure you're aware that the u.s. ambassador to the united states whom you know and you've worked with has now withdrawn her name from consideration to the b the u.s. secretary of state. do you have a reaction to that? >> not really. it's ambassador rice's decision. the only thing i can say is that if it means that ambassador rice is going to spend four more years in the united nations i'll have to ask for double pay. >> woodruff: (laughs) why do you say that? >> she has been one tough individual in the united nations. but i've had i think sometimes a stormy but moist of the time friendly relationship with her. so i would be looking forward to that. particularly if i'm given double pay for the additional effort. >> woodruff: do you think the fact she won't be secretary of state is a loss for the united states? >> you know, i don't want to get into that. this is a domestic matter for the united states. >> woodruff: well, ambassador vitaly churkin, we thank you for being with us. >> thank you. >> warner: still to come on the "newshour": strong approval for the president in the fiscal crisis; the debate over raising the age of eligibility for medicare; links between addictions and our genes. plus, an exit interview with the u.s. envoy to afghanistan and pakistan. but first, the other news of the day. here's hari sreenivasan. >> sreenivasan: as judy just mentioned, the u.s. ambassador to the u.n.-- susan rice-- withdrew her name from consideration for the office of secretary of state today. president obama released a statement saying he'd accepted her decision, but regretted the unfair and misleading attacks on her in recent weeks. rice has come under criticism from congressional republicans for not immediately calling the attack on the u.s. consulate in benghazi, libya a terrorist action. in her letter, rice wrote, "the position of secretary of state should never be politicized. i'm saddened that we have reached this point." in u.s. economic news, the number of americans filing new claims for jobless benefits fell sharply last week to its second- lowest level this year. and retail sales rebounded in november, rising 0.3% but that seemingly good news did little to help stocks on wall street today. the dow jones industrial average lost almost 75 points to close at just under 13,171. the nasdaq fell more than 21 points to close at 2,992. the european union came a step closer to a full-fledged banking union today. after an all-night meeting in brussels, e.u. finance ministers agreed to give the european central bank oversight of eurozone banks, as well as banks in other e.u. countries that choose to opt-in. the european commissioner for economic and monetary affairs said the agreement was an important step forward for europe. >> last night's decision on the single supervisory mechanism for euro area banks is a breakthrough towards a true banking union, which is significant and crucial in order to restore and reinforce confidence in the european economy. >> sreenivasan: the banking superviser role must be approved by the european parliament, but the position could be up and running by march of next year. separately, finance ministers agreed to give greece its next bailout payment of $64 billion. in return, greece has agreed to reduce its debt load by buying back devalued bonds from private investors. the european court of human rights issued a landmark ruling today condemning the c.i.a.'s extraordinary renditions programs. it ruled that a german car salesman khaled el-masri was a victim of torture and abuse for four months at the hands of the c.i.a. el-masri said he was kidnapped from macedonia in 2003, interrogated and tortured at an afghan prison run by the c.i.a. and then dropped on an albanian mountainside when authorities realized he posed no threat. macedonia agreed to pay nearly $80,000 in damages. the u.s. has closed internal investigations into the el-masri case. starting today there should be one less reason to reach for the television remote. a new federal law went into effect banning broadcasters from airing commercials at volumes louder than the programming they accompany. the television industry has had one year to adopt the new rules. violations can be reported on the federal communication commission's website. mobile phones are a dangerous distraction for many american pedestrians. that was the finding of a university of washington study published in the journal "prevention." it tracked 1,100 pedestrians in seattle, washington and found more than a third of people text, talk or listen to music when they cross the street. only one in four people followed the proper safety protocol, looking both ways and obeying the light. vehicle-pedestrian accidents kill 4,000 people every year in the u.s. and injure 60,000 others. the man who co-invented the bar code joseph woodland has died in new jersey. woodland's bar codes are on nearly every product in stores today. he came up with the idea after drawing morse code dots and dashes in the sand on a miami beach, absent-mindedly letting his fingers drag a series of parallel lines instead. the idea was patented in 1952 but not put into wide use until the 1970s. woodland was 91 years old. those are some of the day's major stories. now, back to margaret. >> warner: 18 days and counting until the end of the year when the government reaches the edge of the so-called fiscal cliff. congressional correspondent kwame holman kicks off our coverage tonight >> reporter: late in the day, house speaker john boehner left capitol hill to meet privately with president obama at the white house, their second face- to-face meeting in a week. after a day of heated rhetoric that began on capitol hill, when boehner was blunt in again rejecting the president's demand for power to raise the country's debt ceiling. >> zero. congress is never going to give up our ability to control the purse. and the fact is, is that the debt limit ought to be used to bring fiscal sanity to washington, d.c. >> reporter: as the deadline to reach a deal to avert the fiscal cliff draws ever closer, republicans say the real issue is spending cuts. >> listen, republicans want to solve this problem by getting the spending line down. the president wants to pretend that spending isn't the problem. that's why we don't have an agreement. >> reporter: a claim the white house denies, spokesman jay carney. >> let's just be clear. there is one party to these negotiations who has put forward a specific proposal for revenue and a specific proposal for spending cuts. even when the republicans-- and i saw speaker boehner do this earlier today-- insist that the president hasn't put forward spending cuts, one, it begs the question, what spending cuts have the republicans put forward? >> reporter: the president was asked if he was optimistic about reaching a deal. >> still a work in progress. >> reporter: but senate majority leader harry reid said republicans in congress should yield to public opinion about tax increases. >> speaker boehner knows or should know that the middle- class tax help that we have to pass would sail through the house of representatives. democrats would overwhelmingly vote for it. i would doubt there could be any democrat that would vote against it. and as we know from the chorus of republicans that are added to every day, more republicans join every day. >> reporter: in fact, new polls show americans do want compromise, and it's the democrats who hold the edge. an nbc/"wall street journal" poll released yesterday shows a majority. 65% say president obama has a mandate on both increasing taxes on the wealthy and reducing federal spending; a similar two-thirds are willing to accept tax increases or cuts in federal government programs to reach a deal. but while public support on taxes is overwhelming, opinion on proposed cuts is less so. a new pew research center poll out today shows: three-quarters said deficit reduction should come from cutting major programs and increasing taxes. majorities disapprove of specific cuts to education, infrastructure, defense and anti-poverty programs. and just more than half oppose raising the eligibility age for social security and medicare. while both sides have proposed cuts and changes to medicare, only limited specifics have been released. >> woodruff: now, for more on what the public thinks about how the leaders are handling the negotiations and the debate over cuts to medicare, we turn to ray suarez. he begins with the pew research center poll. he talked about it a short time ago with the pew research center's andrew kohut. >> brown: andy kohut, welcome. you've been measuring public attitudes since election day. is it shifting in a way that gives president obama a stronger hand in dealing with republican leaders as we approach the fiscal cliff? >> no question. he's gotten a lot of -- he has a lot of capital with the public. his approval ratings have surged to 55%. a point of comparison, president bush in december, 2004, was at 48%. we asked people is obama trying to make a serious effort to negotiate a deal, get a deal, 55% say yes. when we say the same thing about republican leaders just 32% say yes. the democrats are better regarded in this negotiation than the republicans by a lot. >> suarez: did you ask people what they would be willing to put up with in order to get some sort of solution? for instance, do they support raising taxes on the wealthiest americans? >> well, they have a very mixed view of things. they support raising taxes on those who earn more than $250,000. 69%, i believe the statistic. they believe in raising taxes on investment income. they believe in limiting the number of deductions that can be taken. things that are in the realm of rich people, or more wealthy people making a sacrifice are strongly endorsed by the public or accepted by the public. i won't say strongly endorsed. but when we get to sacrifices that involve a broader part of the american public personally and with respect to important programs they say no. 77% say no. let's no reduce funds for education. 58% said let's not cut funding to help lower income people. there is very little give on raising the retirement age for either social security or for medicare. the public opposes this. so it's one of these deals where the public thinks something has to be done and they are reluctant themselves to accept sacrifices in cuts in programs. >> suarez: so by a very small margin, if i recall your numbers they would support means testing for medicare? that is cutting back on the benefits for wealthy people but not raising the age at which everyone would become eligible? >> that's quite right. again -- it's a funny thing here ray. the fairness issue which looms so large over the past year and over the past few years is playing out in the way people think about how to deal with the fiscal cliff crisis. >> suarez: andy kohut of the pew research center. thanks a lot. >> you're welcome, ray. >> suarez: and that brings us to a big part of the medicare debate. should the eligibility age for future retirees be raised from 65 to 67? many democrats have pressured the president this week to oppose any attempt to do so. but in an interview with abc news, president obama indicated that he may be open to the idea as part of a compromise. we have our own debate about this and its potential impact. neera tanden is president of the center for american progress. she previously worked for the obama administration working on health care reform. and tevi troy is a senior fellow at the hudson institute. he served as mitt romney's healthcare policy adviser during the presidential campaign. and tevi troy, if we phase in a higher age for medicare eligibility, do you really save much money? >> yeah, over a ten-year period we're looking at $125 billion in savings. over a 75-year period we're looking at a trillion dollars off medicare's long-term liability. so this is real money. it makes a real difference. over 20 years 5% savings. look, the kohut argument is that people want cuts but they don't want to pay for the cuts. policymakers have to make choices about what the best cuts are. >> suarez: are there any countervailing costs we have to worry about? if you move the bar from 65 to 67 don't people arrive at the threshold after years of underinsurance or uninsurance sicker and thus more expensive than this would have been if they enter the program earlier? >> there are problems and there's not perfect and neera's study talks about this but what you have is first of all it's phased in over a long period of time. second of all people are living a lot longer. when social security first came around people were living to 62. medicare they're living to 70, now they're living to 80 years old. people retiring flow spending 30% of their time in retirement. we need an alternative because we can't pay for these beneficiaries for such a long period. >> suarez: neera han den, it's assume add in the government writ large has to spend less money. why not save money this way? >> well, we agree and at the center for american progress we've put forward savings on the medicare program of $385 billion. we believe there needs to be savings. so we can have savings that actually don't affect beneficiary this is way. what i would disagree with tevi about is really this is a way that just simply shifts costs from the federal government to employers, states, and seniors themselves. and, in fact, because medicare is a program that is extremely efficient, cheaper than private insurance, what ends up happening is that really for the amount of money you save at the federal level people at the state level, employers, they spend more money per beneficiary. so we have 400,000 seniors, we have to have 400,000 seniors without health insurance. for those who do have health insurance their costs will rise an average of $2,000. so this is a poor idea of how to save money because what it's doing sin creasing as a country on health care. to simply lower the federal budget that makes no sense. >> suarez: didn't we do something similar for social security? by changing the eligibility date people had to over time change their plans. they work longer, they realize they were going to retire at 67, not at 65. will people make similar adjustments in the face of a new medicare eligibility age? >> i'm so glad you asked about this, ray. in has been a very poor analogy used on both sides. we don't believe-- democrats and republicans-- in universal retirement. we recognize retirement is for a certain age. but as democrats and progressives and the president himself as believed in universal health care. we have the affordable care act because we believe people should have insurance. we have private insurance because we think people should have insurance. we don't think that people should just not have insurance below a certain age. so really what we're saying-- and because of the affordable care act we have a system where a lot of these seniors who were cut off medicare will move to private insurance or the affordable care act but it will cost more money when we do so. for us that makes no sense. and for conservatives who argue about competitiveness and the need to get our economy going, the idea that we're going to take seniors 65, 66, 67 years old out of the medicare pool where they're the cheapest group in that pool and they bring the cost of that pool down and put the them in the pool of employers, that will raise the cost of insurance for everybody in the private insurance system and make it more expensive to provide insurance. so this is really a bad idea for companies, for states who are -- who have big costs and that's why we think it's a poor idea. >> suarez: tevi troy, what about neera tanden's point? >> sure there's costs shifting. you're reducing medicare's cost and that's why? has to pay. that's why polls show people don't want to do this. the fact is you'll be reducing medicare costs by $125 billion. if you're making the argument that the affordable care act gives people opportunities to get insurance elsewhere than than that's what we're doing here and in addition this is effectively a form of means testing. it's saying the wealthiest seniors will have to pay more. they'll have to get insurance privately or work longer and this that the poorest seniors will be more likely to go on medicaid, may work longer or they may also go on the exchanges. so there are other options out there but this is it. this is the point. we're trying to force people to make choices. >> suarez: as we're phasing in the affordable care act as a nation many states are, as they were allowed by the supreme court decision, opting out of that new medicaid plan. can medicaid pick up the slack if the poorest seniors are going to get less services in the states where they live? >> sure. first of all, we don't know how many states are going to take up the medicaid expansion and we don't know how many states are going to take up the exchanges. i suspect more states will do the medicaid expansion than the exchanges and that's what we're seeing so far. but the fact is that there will be a number of options. medicaid is one of them. the exchange is one of them. >> working longer is one of them. for the wealthier seniors they're the ones who that going to have to bear if brunt of this. poorer seniors will have more options. >> suarez: neera, tevi troy submits there are places in the design of current health care policy to pick up some of the slack for those 65 to 67-year-olds. why wouldn't it work? >> sure. many will be picked up, but many won't be. and, again, we put out a report that shows we'll have 400,000 seniors that won't have health insurance. a lot of seniors will come from states where they're not doing the medicaid expansion so they'll be lost in the cracks, if you will. those are people who would be working poor today and so we're talking about making those seniors the most vulnerable and when tevi discusses the $1 125 billion this will save, we recognize that there's a need for savings, but we can have savings in the medicare program that doesn't hit ben fish j.c.s, it doesn't break the promise of medicare, the promise that's been made to seniors and that really looks at things like competitive bidding, other ways that you can derive savings in the health care system by making it more effective and more efficient and to drive down national health insurance because that should be our goal instead of simply making seniors pay more for their health care we should actually reduce those expenditures. >> suarez: near rattan den and tevi troy, thank you both. >> thank you. >> warner: our reporting partners at kaiser health news asked policy experts how they would control medicare costs. read their responses online. >> woodruff: next, addiction and the role of genetics. "newshour" science correspondent miles o'brien provides a personal take as he hones in on those connections and the latest research. >> reporter: so far as i know, there's no law against reporting under the influence, so here goes something. a stiff dose of 30 grams of pure ethanol, mixed with diet coke, the equivalent of three stiff drinks chugged in eight minutes or less. a bottoms-up moment to help get to the bottom of the link between addiction and our genes. marc schuckit is a professor of psychiatry at the university of california san diego. he's been studying the genetic links to alcoholism for more than 35 years. can you look at a genetic array right now and identify the potential alcoholics? are we at that point yet? >> no. it's a great question. we haven't come to the major pathway of greatest interest to me. each of the sets of genes operates in different pathways and each of those is only explaining part of the pathway itself. >> reporter: but he and others are getting close. the current conventional wisdom: the risk of alcoholism is about 50% to 60% rooted in our genetic code. and researchers have identified at least six genes that impact our sensitivity to alcohol. so this idea that many people might have that there is some sort of master alcoholic gene doesn't exist? >> i doubt it. i doubt a master alcoholic gene exists. of course, i could be wrong. >> reporter: whatever the genetic recipe is, "new york times" media reporter and columnist david carr is certain it is wired into his d.n.a. did you come close to dying? >> yeah, quite a few times. >> reporter: carr has been clean and sober for 20 years now, but nearly lost everything after years of drug and alcohol addiction, all of it chronicled in his lyrical 2008 memoir the night of the gun. so you think there's probably some genes inside you that make you want this more than others? >> since i've been three or four years old, i would spin around until i got dizzy and then fall down. i think the desire to feel different than i feel right at this moment and see how pretty much baked in me. >> reporter: which brings us back to dr. schuckit's scientific saloon. >> the tests i take under the influence will determine how sensitive i am to alcohol. >> reporter: he designed the regime for a long-term study of 450 men. it's been underway for 30 years now. schuckit found those who get tipsy easily are about three times less likely to become alcoholics, but those who have to drink a lot before they feel buzzed are at much greater risk- - they have a 45% chance of becoming an alcoholic-- 60% if they come from a family of alcoholics. >> so this low response, no matter what the mechanism might be regarding what's going on in the environment, whatever the mechanism might be is increasing the risk for heavy drinking and alcohol problems. >> if you drink one glass and you get drunk and you do that all the time, you're just as much an alcoholic as the person who needs to drink ten glasses, right? is alcohol about the volume imbibed or the net effect? >> the real question is do you want to get intoxicated or not? and if you want to get intoxicated and you have to drink a lot, then you spend a lot of time drinking. hang out with people who spend a lot of time drinking; you don't hang out with me because i don't spend that much time drinking, and you change the way you look at alcohol and you start increasing ever more the amount of alcohol that you're taking. >> reporter: david carr will drink to that. metaphorically, of course. it's not just nature. it's nature and nurture or it's genes and the environment that come at play. would you agree with that? >> when you're fully engaged in the alcoholic or addictive lifestyle, you're constantly looking for the same or maybe a guy who's just a little farther down the gutters so you can feel okay about yourself, so you tend to sort of channel yourself into groups where what you're doing seems or feels normal. >> reporter: i know what you are thinking. this reminds you the fruit fly drosophilia, right? well, it does if you are neuroscientist and fruit fly expert ulrike heberlein at the howard hughes medical institutes janelia farm research center near washington d.c. do you love fruit flies? >> i love fruit flies, particularly drunk fruit flies. quite honestly, i didn't know what we were doing back then, but when i saw the very first drunk fruit fly, i said this is it. >> reporter: dr. heberlein and her team use fruit flies as a model for studying alcoholism. when the flies breathe ethanol vapor, they get hyper, bump into the walls, become unable to fly, and then pass out. so, what you really saw was the arc of a human buzz? >> absolutely. >> reporter: in something that buzzes. >> and so, very, very good. ( laughter ) >> reporter: here, they are homing in on specific addiction genes. mutant fly strains are named cheap date, happy hour and tank, depending on their genes and how they control the hankering for booze. the researchers are also looking at how outside influences can encourage flies to become barflies after male fruit flies are spurned by females not interested in mating, they drink twice as much alcohol as those who just had sex with a receptive female. >> they may compensate by drinking to normalize their sort of reward system. >> reporter: key to the reward system for fruit flies and humans are molecules called neuropeptides. they travel from neuron to neuron, allowing brain cells to communicate with each other. >> rejection reduced the levels of neuropeptide-f and mating increases the levels. and we were able to show that reducing the levels of neuropeptide-f leads to enhanced drinking, the converse elevating levels of n.p.f. led to reduce drinking. >> reporter: but neuropeptides are just part of the internal chemistry of reward and its link addiction. psychiatrist nora volkow is director of the national institute on drug abuse. she is running down a pathway toward learning more about dopamine-- our internally produced feel good drug-- the chemical designed to reward behavior that is important for survival, like eating, procreating or even a brisk morning run. >> when you take a drug or the drug hijacks, that reward system, basically it stimulates it in a much more potent way than any natural rewards. and that starts this cycle that the more you take drugs, the higher it gets, the higher it gets, the worst you feel. the normal rewards are no longer motivating to your behavior. >> reporter: volkow has imaged the brains of cocaine addicts while they view a photo of someone using the drug. just that image can increase an addicts dopamine production. just the sight of it gets things going? >> yes, exactly just the sight of it gets things going, but now the more they actually increase dopamine when they see these images, the more they decide to take the drug and the more they are motivated to go and engage in behaviors to get the drug. the more scientists understand addiction, the more intractable the problem seems. after all, it is fueled by some processes that are fundamental to human survival. that is not stopping scientists from searching for drugs to counteract the disease. just don't expect a silver bullet. is this something that could be solved with a pill? >> that's the myth that drives all addictions is that whatever is going on with you can be a erased if you just find this mythical level of if i take this inhibitor and i take this one then it looks after my mood that somehow-- i've been doing that math all my life. it has never worked. so my own take would be as if there was a pill to prevent addiction, i wouldn't get involved in it because i've already tried that route. >> reporter: now for a confession: like david carr, my family tree is filled with alcoholics. so i took the marc schuckit booze challenge with some trepidation. learning that i was one of those drink them under the table guys would be, well, sobering to say the least. >> what's your level of response? how do you react to the alcohol? and you're about average. >> reporter: so while i may carry the genes of an irish pub crawler, my odds are slightly better that i will not become an alcoholic. and just knowing all of this is enough to make me think twice at the end of a long day, when the siren call of dopamine tells me it's time for a taste. >> woodruff: you can see how miles performed in the lab as the subject of an alcohol study. watch the video, which is part of our science thursday series online. >> warner: we turn to afghanistan, where there was more violence today as the secretary of defense visited. >> we'll be drawing down our forces. >> warner: defense secretary leon panetta met afghan president hamid karzai in kabul today to discuss the scale of the drawdown of u.s. forces in afghanistan by 2014. >> obviously the afghan army will assume full responsibility for the security of the country, but we will be there to provide support, to provide training, to provide assistance, to provide help on counterterrorism and to provide for support for the forces that are here. >> warner: the last of president's obama's 33,000 so- called surge forces left afghanistan in september. some 66,000 remain. earlier on his trip, panetta met with his afghan counterpart general john allen, commander of international security forces there. panetta also greeted troops at the main u.s. base in kandahar. just after his visit, one american soldier was killed and three wounded by a suicide bomber outside the main gate of kahandar airfield. the taliban claimed responsibility. panetta said in kabul the attack showed desperation. >> this is what they resort to in order to try to continue to try to stimulate chaos in this country. they will not be successful. >> warner: meanwhile, there are ongoing efforts to find a political solution to the war. karzai and pakistani president asif ali zardari in ankara, >> we should be taking practical steps, in bringing more confidence and trust with reserves to the countries of afghanistan and pakistan. >> warner: and today pakistan announced it would release nine more taliban prisoners, for a total of 18 this month, as requested by the afghan high peace council. for the past two years, the u.s. has been attempting to engage the taliban. in march, talks broke down on a deal to release five taliban militants from the u.s. detention center in guantanamo bay in exchange for the release of a u.s. soldier held by a taliban affiliate. but secretary of state hillary the point man for the u.s. in these negotiations has been marc grossman, envoy to afghanistan and pakistan. a career diplomat, he took the post after ambassador richard holbrooke's sudden death, two years ago today. marc grossman, who is leaving his post this week, joins me to talk about his time as envoy and the challenges that lie ahead. thank you for coming in. >> thank you for having me. >>. >> warner: so you are one of the few u.s. officials who have ever met with representatives of the taliban. your first meeting was someone who was described as a former aide to mullah omar in october of 2011 what was it like? what was he like? >> well, first of all, thank you very much for having me. you know, it was abexperience that both very productive and very difficult. one of the challenges that secretary clinton gave me when we took this job was to see if i coulden find and then have this conversation with the taliban. and what she said in a very important speech was you don't make peace with your friends, you make peace with your enemies. and what i did, margaret, in order to get ready for that first encounter was i read a lot by people who had been in similar situations in northern ireland, in have sri lanka, in colombia, and everybody talked about how difficult it was to fight and talk at the same time. yet everybody came to the same conclusion if you stick with this, if you believe in this, you can find someone on the other side to talk to you and you're successful and less people die. so the ambiguities of it, the challenges of it kind of all pale against the possibilities that if you're successful less people die. so i think that's important in getting ready for is that if only reason we have these conversations with the taliban was to open the door for afghans to talk to other afghans about the future of afghanistan. >> warner: let me ask you this, because the u.s. was snookered once thinking it was meeting with a representative of the taliban and the guy was an imposter. how did you determine that this fellow was a genuine representative of the upper echelon to the taliban? >> that's a very fair question. we got a personal sense of him and i think we both did the same thing to each other. i asked him for certain things, he asked me for certain things and those things got delivered in a way that we felt was legitimate and showed that very much he could ask a question, get guidance from people senior to him and bring that guidance back we thought we had found somebody worth talking to and as you said in the opening, in mark's 15th we had to end those conversations. >> warner: first of all, what was he looking? what did you deseuss from what he said and the body language about why he was actually. >> well, i think they were there to see, like we were there, if it might be possible to develop some confidence between the united states and this insurgent group so one of the jobs we took upon ourselves was to see if we could design and carry out a series of confidence building between the two sides and, again i repeat that the only reasons to have those confidence building measures was to open the door for the taliban to talk to the government of afghanistan. >> warner: one was this prisoner exchange wed talk about. the gitmo prisoners. what happened? >> unfortunately, it didn't happen. >> warner: why? because one side pulled back? >> we don't want to do anything that might prejudice something in the future. we haven't made any decisions about moving anybody from guantanamo in that arrangement, first. it's very important for you and the viewers to recognize that whatever we would do would certainly be consistent with all of the laws of the united states and very important consultation with congress and we consulted with congress quite a lot on this subject. >> warner: they had a lot to say? >> well, they did and fair enough. that's the kind of government we have. >> warner: where do prospects stand now as you leave this post for some kind of negotiated way out of this war or resolution to this war even as u.s. troops are drawing down? >> i think it's very important to step back and go back to the speech and consider the job we were given a couple years ago. the first job is to see if it might be possible to create a regional structure for a secure, stable, prosperous afghanistan, inside of a secure, stable, prosperous region. and we set out to do that through a series of international meetings in chicago and tokyo so afghans could feel confident that the region would stand behind them. >> warner: do you think talks are going to resume? for instance, one of the new elements is pakistan which has been sheltering the taliban, always saw them as an asset. do you think they're sin here? if so what's changed? >> as i end this responsibility, i was given this task to see if we could have a direct dialogue with the taliban and since march 15 that hasn't been possible. but i this if you look back two years and say to yourself was afghan peace on the agenda on afghanistan in the region two years ago, very little. now, i think what's happened here is that there's been a real effort to create an afghan peace process. on pakistan in particular i think one of the things that's really changed in the last year or so has been the effort by pakistan to get itself on line to support the afghan peace process. a year ago there was no way-- not possible-- systematically to have afghanistan, pakistan, and the united states talk to one another about peace and we created a core group of those three countries, it's met eight times so i think there's a lot of effort on the pakistan side to support afghan peace. >> warner: why? do they think it would be in their interest to have a peaceful afghanistan? >> i think if you listen to the foreign minister and other pakistanis who speak they know that chaos in afghanistan, it's bad for them. they know also that 2014 when this transition you described is coming, it's not 20 years from now, not ten years from now, in diplomatic terms it's tomorrow so we've signed a strategic partnership agreement with afghanistan. the pakistanis, i think, recognize that. it changes their calculation, perhaps. but they, i think, are increasingly clear that they support the afghan peace process as well. as your setup showed, this release of these prisoners is important. >> warner: what's the alternative? if the the u.s. leaves, takes out most of his troops at the end of 2014, what's the al ternive? are we looking at civil war? >> oh, well, i think it's really important for people to not set this up as the united states is leaving. there will still be american troops in afghanistan on january 1, 2015 and the president will decide what number that is. but this isn't only about the military force this is about a civilian presence, an economic presence. and i know it's not so interesting but this regional structure that we've set up is also the commitment of the international community to be there after january, 2015. >> warner: ambassador marc grossman, thank you so much. >> thank you very much. >> warner: enjoy your time off. >> thank you. >> woodruff: finally tonight, we come back to two late-breaking stories: u.n. ambassador susan rice withdrawing her name from consideration to be secretary of state and another white house meeting between president obama and speaker boehner. for the latest, we turn to margaret talev, a white house correspondent for bloomberg news. margaret, a lot going on at the white house today. what are they saying there about this meeting with the speaker that i guess ended what, about an hour somethat that >> that's right, they're saying precious it will which will some would see is an indication that progress is made. treasury secretary geithner was there and the only indication they're giving us is that talks are proceeding respectfully and they're hopeful a resolution can be reached but whether they got closer it's not clear at this point. we have to learn more. >> woodruff: i was reading quotes from an interview the president did this afternoon with a cbs affiliate. i believe in chicago where he said among other things he's hopeful of getting the fiscal cliff resolved and saying it shouldn't be that hard. that's a contrast with the kind of language we're hearing from the speaker who said in a press conference today at the capitol that the president isn't giving, that he doesn't see any progress. how do you explain it? >> they have different constituencies and speaker boehner as got republicans in his house caucus who may face primary challenges if they're not perceived as tough enough on holding the line against the tax increases and on demanding spending cuts and in order to be able to bring them on board and get the votes he needs, he needs to be able to demonstrate that they've pushed hard against the president's initial offerings. and that has a lot to do with paving the way for a framework and a deal. >> woodruff: is the white house prepared to give him something to help him with his contentious cause of action, is what the president called it today? >> to some extent the president has already dialed back his initial demand from 1.6 to 1.4 but out of the starting block the republicans weren't prepared to accept that anyhow. the president is seeking to accommodate the speaker's consideration because the president wants a deal and so does the speaker. joe biden would have called it a kabuki dance if it were a supreme court nomination but there is posturing on both sides that need to take place but underneath that this isn't just poos which you aring. this is a difficult decision most of which are probably going to be reached next year but some of which have to happen before anybody leaves town for the holidays. >> woodruff: margaret, the other big development out of the white house was the announcement that susan race as a u.n. ambassador withdrawing her name as candidate to be secretary of state. what's behind this >> this is a personal disappointment for president. she's a close friend, loyal to him, he liked her very much. from what we're hearing this was her decision not the white house's decision. i mean, obviously publicly she says it was her decision but behind the scenes they're saying it was her call. it got to a point where she realized that the controversies weren't going to go away, the criticisms of her for handling of benghazi and that even if she were able to be confirmed it would be perhaps a political price that was not worth asking the president to pay. >> woodruff: very quickly, what are you hearing? we keep hearing senator john kerry. >> he's the leading candidate from everybody we're talking to at the white house in washington and more broadly nothing's done until it's done. the president can do whatever he wants. he can surprise everyone at the last minute but rice and kerry were always seen as the two leading candidates and this may make the president's decision that much easier we expect to hear next week about state, defense, maybe c.i.a. >> warner: margaret talev of bloomberg news, thank you very much. >> thank you. >> warner: and an online update before we go, starting with the story of one of the world's archaeological treasures. hari sreenivasan has more. >> sreenivasan: a 2,600-year-old buddhist site is threatened in afghanistan as a chinese company plans to mine copper below its surface. archaeologists are hustling to excavate and a filmmaker is documenting the process. see photos on art beat. and from our global cancer series, we look at infections that trigger cancer in the developing world. all that and more is on our web site newshour.pbs.org. margaret? >> warner: and that's the "newshour" for tonight. i'm margaret warner. >> woodruff: and i'm judy woodruff. we'll see you online and again here tomorrow evening with mark shields and david brooks among others. thank you and good night. >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: >> and with the ongoing support of these institutions and foundations. and... >> this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. captioning sponsored by macneil/lehrer productions captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org >> this is "bbc world news america." funding of this presentation is made possible by the freeman foundation of new york, stowe, vermont, and honolulu, newman's own foundation, and union bank. >> at union bank, our relationship managers work hard to know your business, offering specialized solutions and capital to help you meet your growth objectives. we offer expertise and tailored solutions for small businesses and major corporations. what can we do for you? >> and now, "bbc world news america." >> this is "bbc world news america." i am katty kay. russia says what many are already thinking. syrian rebels may win this war. moscow is preparing to drop assad. susan rice draws her name from consideration as next secretary of state of peron
PBS
Dec 6, 2012 3:00pm PST
. >> woodruff: with 25 days left until the year-end fiscal cliff, and just 19 days until christmas, president obama warned lawmakers today not to add to the holiday pressures americans already feel, by letting the political stalemate drag on. but he also again insisted there would be no deal unless tax rates went up on the wealthy. >> the closer it gets to the brink, the more stressed we're going to be. >> woodruff: president obama made the short trip to northern virginia today to underline his plan to avert the fiscal cliff. at the home of what the white house called a typical middle class family, mr. obama said he's optimistic that agreement can be reached, but again drew a hard line for republicans in congress. >> everybody's is going to have to share in some sacrifice. but it starts with folks who are in the best position to sacrifice. who are in the best position to step up . just to be clear i'm not going to sign any package that somehow prevents the top rate from going up, the top 2% from going up. >> woodruff: the president phoned house speaker john boehner yesterday, their first dire
PBS
Dec 6, 2012 6:00pm PST
>> brown: then, margaret warner looks at the political strife in egypt, after deadly clashes in the streets and resignations by top officials. >> woodruff: we have a battleground dispatch from a coastal city facing rising sea levels and the next big storm. >> if sandy were to come close or directly into norfolk i think we'd all be in big trouble. >> brown: we assess the latest diplomatic moves to end syria's war, as secretary of state hillary clinton meets with russia's foreign minister. >> woodruff: and ray suarez has the story of a program that aims to put students at low-achieving schools on a path to high school graduation. >> we're here to make things better. we're here to tutor kids. we're here to make sure that they stay on track. we are here to make sure that they graduate. we want to prepare them for high school. >> brown: that's all ahead on tonight's "newshour." major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: ♪ ♪ moving our economy for 160 years. bnsf, the engine that connects us. and by the alfred p. sloan foundation. supporting science, technology, and improved economic performance and financial literacy in the 21st century. and with the ongoing support of these institutions and foundations. and... this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. >> woodruff: with 25 days left until the year-end fiscal cliff, and just 19 days until christmas, president obama warned lawmakers today not to add to the holiday pressures americans already feel, by letting the political stalemate drag on. but he also again insisted there would be no deal unless tax rates went up on the wealthy. >> the closer it gets to the brink, the more stressed we're going to be. >> woodruff: president obama made the short trip to northern virginia today to underline his plan to avert the fiscal cliff. at the home of what the white house called a typical middle class family, mr. obama said he's optimistic that agreement can be reached, but again drew a hard line for republicans in congress. >> everybody's is going to have to share in some sacrifice. but it starts with folks who are in the best position to sacrifice. who are in the best position to step up . just to be clear i'm not going to sign any package that somehow prevents the top rate from going up, the top 2% from going up. >> woodruff: the president phoned house speaker john boehner yesterday, their first direct talk in almost a week. but today white house spokesman jay carney wouldn't share details of the call. >> we believe it's in the interest of achieving an agreement not to do that. >> reporter: treasury secretary timothy geithner said yesterday the white house was absolutely willing to go over the cliff if republicans held firm in their opposition to raising rates on the wealthy. but it was the administration's other demand-- to give the president authority over the nation's debt ceiling that roiled tempers on capitol hill. senate minority leader mitch mcconnell tried yesterday to force a vote on the issue, assuming republicans would prevail. >> look, the only way we ever cut spending around here is by using the debate over the debt limit to do it. now the president wants to remove that spur to cut altogether. it gets in the way of his spending plans. i assure you, it's not going to happen. >> reporter: but when majority leader harry reid took him up on the offer today, mcconnell backed down. >> what we have here is a case i told everyone that we are willing to have that vote, up or down vote, and now the gop leader objects to his own idea. >> woodruff: meantime, republicans learned today the party was losing one of their most outspoken voices on fiscal issues. two-term south carolina senator jim demint announced that he will resign in january. to become the next president of the heritage foundation-- a conservative washington think tank. in a statement, demint said, a tea party favorite, demint had blasted the house republicans' proposal to raise revenue earlier in the week. south carolina's other senator lindsey graham lamented the loss of his colleague and friend. >> he really did strongly and passionately advocate for his position and did it very effectively, jim made the republican party quite frankly look inward and do some self evaluation, conservatism is an asset not a liability. >> woodruff: the other side of capitol hill was largely quiet today, with the house not in session, and most members gone home for the weekend's recess. >> brown: still to come on the "newshour": egypt's political turmoil; trims to social programs to solve the fiscal crisis; sea level rise in a virginia city; diplomatic movement on syria and a path to high school graduation. but first, the other news of the day. here's hari sreenivasan. >> sreenivasan: the death toll from a typhoon in the southern philippines climbed to more than 370 today. nearly 400 others are still missing since the storm hit tuesday. rescue workers in the hardest- hit compostela valley province battled surging flood waters again today, to reach survivors. most of their homes were demolished, along with just about everything else. >> ( translated ): since i was born, this has never happened here. when i came back here yesterday, i cried because of what i saw. you can see our hills, everything is gone. 100% of the crops are gone. >> sreenivasan: the typhoon is now swirling over the south china sea. it's expected to break up by the weekend. washington state is now the first state in the nation where recreational use of marijuana, by adults, is legal. the new law was approved by voters last month, and took effect at midnight. in seattle, about 100 people marked the occasion by smoking joints beneath the city's iconic space needle. technically, doing that in public remains against the law. marijuana is still illegal under federal law. but the justice department has not said if it will try to block the washington state law or a similar statute in colorado. same-sex marriage also became legal in washington state today, and in maryland. gay and lesbian couples in both states began picking up marriage licenses. those in washington state have to wait three days to be married. same-sex weddings in maryland will begin on january first. maine will legalize the practice on december 29. the three states are the first to approve same-sex marriage by popular vote. in economic news, new jobless claims fell sharply last week, after a temporary spike in the wake of hurricane sandy. and on wall street, stocks managed modest gains today. the dow jones industrial average added 39 points to close at 1,374. the nasdaq rose 15 points to close at 2,989. the u.s. senate has overwhelmingly approved a bill normalizing trade relations with russia. but the measure also contained provisions to punish russian officials accused of human rights offenses-- a move the russian government has denounced. the house passed the legislation last month. president obama has pledged to sign it into law. it was all smiles today for the duchess of cambridge, as she left a london hospital. the former kate middleton was discharged after being treated for severe morning sickness. the duchess emerged with her husband, prince william, three days after being admitted. the hospital stay prompted royal officials to announce her pregnancy to the public. those are some of the day's major stories. now, back to jeff. >> brown: and to egypt. within the last 24 hours the country has seen the worst violence since president mohamed morsi was elected in june. seven people were killed and more than 600 hurt during overnight clashes in cairo outside the presidential palace. we have a report from jonathan rugman of "independent television news." >> reporter: last year, they ousted a dictator. last night, they turned against one another. religious and secular egyptians fighting outside the palace of their first freely-elected president. after riot police gave up keeping the two warring sides apart. seven people were killed and hundreds were injured. both sides were armed with clubs, but eyewitnesses said the first gunfire came from president morsi's supporters. the president's opponents let off fireworks. but they say they won't back down until the president gives up sweeping new powers or resigns. this morning, the army moved in. not to mount a military coup, but to defend a president they would once have jailed for his political views. the commander of these troops said these tanks were just to keep rival factions apart. but if mr. morsi can trigger a political crisis in less than six months, then his presidency may prove short-lived. last month, he was the hero of the hour. america's new point man in the middle east. brokering a ceasefire between israel and gaza. since then he's granted himself unlimited power. and rushed through a draft constitution branded by liberals and christians as a betrayal of egypt's transition to democracy. morsi's muslim brotherhood had 70 years in egypt's political wilderness to prepare for government. though his supporters point out that his religiously-worded constitution will easily pass in a referendum set for later this month. >> ( translated ): why are they always afraid of the ballot box? whenever there is an election or a referendum they're afraid of the ballot box. it is because they know the people are not on their side. >> reporter: tahrir square was far from full today. egypt's had its revolution and that, for many, will suffice. yet the president's opponents say another may now be required. >> ( translated ): we didn't have a revolution just to return to the era of mubarak and worse. >> ( translated ): mohamed morsi has divided the nation. we want him to fall. along with the muslim brotherhood because they are traitors. >> reporter: last night, muslim brotherhood offices were set on fire outside cairo. and crowds with these demands are now gathering again outside his palace. >> sreenivasan: three more officials announced their resignation in wake of the violence. late today, in a televised speech, president morsi called for a comprehensive and productive dialogue. but he also accused some of the opposition of serving the old mubarak regime. and he insisted a referendum on the constitution would go ahead on december 15. margaret warner takes the story from there. >> warner: for more on the clashes and the response by president morsi, i'm joined now by michele dunne. she previously served in the state department and the national security council staff. she's now the director of the rafik hariri center for the middle east at the atlantic council. welcome back. how serious a crisis is this for this new egyptian government and for president morsi himself? >> it's a pivotal moment in the history of egypt after this revolution we're seeing extreme polarization between islamists and non-islamist forces and between parts of the government that that contain people who were there during the mubarak regime. there are a number of senior judges. so there's a lot at stake centering on this debate over the constitution and whether it should go to a public vote. >> warner: the islamists and secularists have been at loggerheads for over a year. why has it hit such a -- at least it looks like a crisis point now, with this kind of violence between the two camps. >> there have been a couple things that have happened in the past couple weeks. with this november 22 decree president mopls did seize extraordinary powers. basically he's trying to prevent the judiciary from dissolving the constituent assembly that was drafting the constitution and so forth and he said the judiciary could not annul his decrees so he's put himself above the judiciary and he has legislative powers since the parliament was dissolved so all this power in the hands of one person then he's forcing ahead this constitution that is still controversial. a lot of people are unhappy with it. >> warner: you've known people, you've been in touch with people from the muslim brotherhood and people around president morsi since before the revolution and i think you met some of them who are here with washington. how did they explain him acting in the way that you just described which has led some to say he's as autocratic as mubarak? >> well, what their side of the story is is that the judiciary they believe was about to dissolve the constituent assembly and basically set the whole political transition back months so that they could not pass the new constitution, old new parliamentary elections and what they feel is that elements of the old mubarak regime are trying to force morsi's presidency to fail. and to keep the political transition from progressing and that morsi ha had to take extraordinary action to prevent that from happening. but the other side of the story is that what morsi is now doing is forcing a popular vote which undoubtedly would approve this draft constitution and then there will be parliamentary elections but it will be difficult to amend the constitution in the future. that takes two-thirds of the parliament and non-islamists know they're not going to have that. >> warner: how do you interpret his televised speech tonight? we don't have all the words, he read them in arabic but was he extending any olive branch by saying "let's have a dialogue starting saturday" or is he taking a hard line? >> i watched morsi's speech and he offered a very small crumb, i would say, to the opposition. he said that the part of the november 22 decree in which he basically gives himself any power necessary to protect the revolution has been misunderstood and he would be all right with canceling that part of it. and he invited them a dialogue with them -- with him. however the dialogue is to be on saturday which is when voting outside of egypt among expats would start and he insisted that voting has to go ahead on the referendum. i doubt that will be acceptable to the opposition. is. >> warner: which they haven't really said except one group. what should we look for next. protests are planned for tomorrow by the opposition, is that right? >> there will be more protests. we saw today the torching of the muslim brotherhood headquarters in cairo and i think unfortunately there's going to be more violence. now, it's possible there will also be more concessions. already, for example, the justice minister who's part of morsi's government hinted that opposition leaders, if they come to this dialogue perhaps they can discuss defering the constitutional referendum. so it may be that there will be more concessions from morsi's side to avert more violence. >> and briefly who has clout or power to shape these events? the u.s.? >> secretary of state clinton has said the right things about the need for dialogue and the need for a constitution that protects the rights of all egyptians and an inclusive process and so forth. now, morsi's advisors heard this but i think what's happening on the streets of cairo and the officials from members of the egyptian government probably speaks louder right now. >> warner: michele dunne, thanks so much. >> it was my pleasure, margaret. >> woodruff: now, to our continuing series of conversations about what's at stake in the battle over taxes, government spending and debt. last night, we heard from republican senator bob corker. tonight, we get a different perspective on the question of so-called entitlements. many lawmakers and economists have argued it's essential to make big changes to medicare and social security. among those ideas are raising the eligibility age; means- testing for wealthy recipients; cuts in spending and benefits and a bigger role for private competition in health care. max richtman has been arguing against making many of these changes as part of this fight. he's the president of an advocacy group, the national committee to preserve social security and medicare. he joins us now. >> welcome. >> thank you for inviting me. >> first of all, why shouldn't social security and medicare be part of the entire group of government spending programs that are being looked at to get to deal with the deficits? >> well, before i answer that i was very interested in the way you characterized these programs as entitlements. so-called, you said, entitlements. and we think that a better term would be earned benefits. you know, i counted the letters in the word "entitlement." there are 11 letters. often people refer to entitlement as a four-letter word and it's a derogatory, derisive characterization. these are earned benefits. people pay for them while they're working, social security part "a" medicare, the hospital part. 25% of the premium for part "b." so i wish we would switch from entitlements to earned benefits, first of all. now answer your question, social security has not added a penny to the federal debt, to the deficits every year. it has a surplus. it has a surplus of $2.7 trillion. so why are we in such a rush to change a program that does not have -- is not bankrupt, has a surplus, has 22 years of solvency before it does have a serious problem and has not contributed to the federal debt? >> and we can talk about these programs separately. we know that social security is considered to be in sounder shape than is medicare which is viewed as potentially running out of funds in the next few years, whereas social security -- but let's take them one at a time. when it comes to social security you have the simpson-bowles deficit reduction commission saying that if you don't deal with these programs you just can't be serious about getting your arms around this country's huge debt and deficit crisis. >> well, i go back to where i started. this program didn't add to the debt, hasn't contributed to the debt. we're not saying -- we're not a group that has our heads in the sand and is committed to never doing anything. social security is a dynamic program. it has changed over time. it will continue to change. but let's look at social security for its own sake. you know, the last time social security was addressed by the congress and the white house it was to improoufl the solvency of social security, not as a scapegoat, not as a bargaining chip for problems that were not created by the program. that's where we're coming from. >> woodruff: but you're not saying don't address it at any time, you're just saying don't address it now? >> i think it's a mistake to address it now. it gets caught up in debate that it shouldn't be part of and we're going to solve social security and medicare in the next two weeks? >> woodruff: let's talk about medicare again for a moment, the other large so-called entitlement program. we've heard a lot of conversation about raising the eligibility age. we know americans are living longer. why isn't that a reasonable solution? president obama himself has said that's something that should be considered. >> well, it's not true that -- as you know, not all americans are living longer. we might be able to do a program like this for a long time, but there are some jobs that are much harder to continue working and have health care benefits and have those available. raising the age for eligibility in medicare would be particularly hard on communities of color. these are people for the most part they tend to have poorer health conditions at an earlier age. they've accumulated less wealth to pay for health care out of their pockets between, let's say 65 and 67 because of lower lifetime earnings and they have a shorter life span. so we don't need to do that. we don't need to look at ree dus benefits-- whether by raising the age for that or means testing or charging seniors more. >> woodruff: let me ask you about means testing which would lower benefits to those at a higher level. we interviewed bob corker of tennessee. he said "i've been successful in business and have made a very good living. why should by getting benefits as large as someone who earns a lot less? >> well, you know, senator corker doesn't have to accept those benefits. i hear that all the time. "i don't need social security. i have my own resources." sometimes the people that say that to me are getting social security. you don't get social security automatically. you have to go down to the office of social security and apply i tell them "if you feel that strongly about it, you don't need it, there's a form on the social security web site that you can fill out and you won't get your benefits. >> pelley: so you're saying it can be done on an individual by individual basis? >> i think so. i think changing social security from an earned ben nate you pay for while you're working into a means-tested program, let's be frank, that turns it into welfare and welfare doesn't have a lot of support in this country. >> woodruff: finally, what about this concept that these are programs that, yes, americans have paid into them but they -- every economist who's looked at them virtually talks about how they are not sustainable in the long term and that what has happened is that it was senior citizens, politically influential, have been able to stave off any trims in benefits or any changes but that ultimately will be harm to feel the next generation and the next general wligs are going to be expected to pay and get benefits that just won't be there. >> as i said, our position isn't -- we're not saying -- any changes off forever. we're saying there are ways to improve social security. there are benefits that need to be improved for women or people that -- communities of color. those benefits need to be improved. medicare, instead of looking at cutting benefits, charging seniors more for premiums, co-payments, deductibles, what about thinking about the gaps in medicare? it's a good program if there's no coverage for hearing aids, hearing aids batteries, dental care, dentures. these are real needs for seniors. so these programs can be adjusted by improveing the efficiencies of the programs but maybe bringing home some revenue not going back to the old mantra of let's cut, cut, cut. >> woodruff: we hear you and i know those are arguments you've bullpen making all over washington. max ritchman, thank you so much. >> thank you so much. >> woodruff: and we'll have different perspectives in the coming days. online we have a report from our partners at kaiser health news on how the fiscal cliff could affect health care for the military and for medicare patients. >> brown: next, a potential crisis of a different kind, one that has new urgency after hurricane sandy and that also involves federal spending: rising sea levels. today, new york city mayor michael bloomberg announced a new long-term initiative to protect the city from future natural disasters. he called for rebuilding vulnerable coastal areas, but dismissed again the idea of constructing a large sea-gate across the harbor. >> we're not going to abandon the waterfront. we're not going to abandon the rockaways or coney island or staten island's south shore. but we can't just rebuild what was there and hope for the best. we have to build smarter and stronger and more sustainably. >> woodruff: 350 miles south. the city of norfolk, virginia, is another coastal city vulnerable to sea level rise and extreme storms. but its mayor has said parts of his city might not be livable in the future. our producer, mike melia, traveled to norfolk recently to look at how it has been struggling with flooding and preparing for the next big storm. he worked with member station whro to bring us this report. it's part of our series-- working with public media partners across the country-- that we call "battleground dispatches." >> reporter: when residents of this port city wake up, even if there wasn't a storm that night, they regularly find some streets flooded from high tides. it is a far cry from the storm surges brought by sandy further up the coast, but that super- storm, which hit the week before election day, brought to the surface the issue of rising sea levels, the vulnerability of coastal cities and what can be done to protect them. in national exit polls, 64% of voters said that president obama's response to the hurricane was a factor in their decision. >> what i will be doing in the next several months is having wide ranging conversations with scientists, engineers and elected officials to find out what more can we do. >> reporter: mr. obama might look to norfolk, where they have been having those conversations for years. >> as we get more high tides and tides seem to get higher and we get more of these storms and they seem to come with a little more fury we get more and more water in our city as the days go by, so we are taking it very seriously. we talk about it nearly monthly. and we are planning for it. >> reporter: mayor paul fraim, a democrat, has been leading the charge and was the first elected official in the country to say parts of his city might not be livable in 15 years. >> we are raising homes. we are raising roads. but we are also retreating very slowly from some of the shoreline so we don't spend money raising houses so that when the next storm comes through they will be damaged again. >> reporter: mr. obama won the battleground state of virginia 51% to 48% over mitt romney. his victory was helped by taking 56% of the vote in the states southeast tidewater region that is home to norfolk. here, where streets like this are frequently under water, some people are hoping the election means political debate about climate change may be over. >> in the last month, this neighborhood has flooded three times. >> reporter: skip stiles heads wetlands watch, a local environmental group that works throughout the state. he took us to another vulnerable area downtown. >> this is an old apartment building. it has been here since 1904. so the abstract notion that we have had a foot of sea level rise in last 100 years. you can mark it against this building. we had a nor'easter in 2006 that came about here, about where sandy came. if you think about it 100 years ago that would be a foot and a half down, it wouldn't even have touched this building. problem is 100 years going forward, if you go up three feet, in 100 years this middle of the road nor'easter is suddenly as high as the storm of record in 1933. >> reporter: the national oceanic and atmospheric administration finds norfolk is the second most vulnerable area its size to sea level rise in the country, right behin
PBS
Dec 11, 2012 12:00am PST
and you go through these kind of economic times like we've had the last decade and it's just -- i think the difference may be -- so few things -- you know, you wake up one morning and fukushima disaster has taken place. now, the night before i went to bed i wasn't thinking about japan. i wasn't thinking about nuclear power. and now it's all-consuming. it just seems like we're in a period of time that's volatile from a geopolitical standpoint. it's volatile from an environment, nature standpoint. >> rose: jeff immelt for the hour. next. >> rose: general electric is the nation's largest industrial company. it employs over 300,000 people around the world. it makes everything from aircraft engines to power plant turbines to medical imaging equipment. the company has evolved over the last decade over jeff immeant's watch. he has led a global expansion and shed once treasured businesses such as plastics and insurance. in 2011, president obama named him to lead the council on jobs and competitiveness. last month, the country created 146,000 jobs, exceeding expectations in the wake of hurricane sandy. further progress will be tested as the fiscal cliff deadline approaches without a deal inside yet. i'm very pleased to have jeff immelt back on this program. welcome >> charlie, thanks, good to be back with you. >> rose: we've talked many times about g.e. since you took over, i think once since -- just after 2001. where is the company today in terms of where do you want it to be and where do you want it to be in the next five years? >> i think, charlie, what we've tried to do is simplify the portfolio into infrastructure and financial services. we like where the portfolio is today. we think in the infrastructure space there's going to be roughly $4 trillion spent each year, so it's an attractive big market. globally is where our opportunities are so the company's -- probably a decade ago 30% of our revenues were outside the united states. now it's more like 60% or 65%. so we think we've got the portfolio we want. we've dramatically increased the amount of technology. and in the end i think technology and innovation are the competitive advantage. we've got a good global footprint. we're in 140 countries. and we've got these deep relationships with customers so i think it's portfolio, technology, customers and real innovation around services and globalization and that's really where the pane is today. >> rose: one thing you're doing is something called the industrial internet. "businessweek" has a piece on that on the newsstand now. what is that and why is that so important to industry in the future? >> i think every industrial company now with sensor technology and software technology has to think about the analytical way around their products. so a jet engine or m.r.i. scanner or gas turbine creates terra bytes of data. usage data. if we could model a jet engine that saves 1% fuel burn every year, that save it is industry $2 billion. that's a lot of money for our customers and we're trying to take the analyticals as expects and restructure in the a way that benefits our customers. if you think about social media, it was about connecting a billion consumers, right? and change the way they shop or do other things. the industrial internet is about really deep domain, deep verticals where 1% of anything is worth hundreds of billions of dollars. >> rose: we really have come with the internet to this emphasis on data and what data can tell us and the cloud has given us an enormous potential. >> completely. information technology in and of itself creates 5% or 10% of the value. connectivity is 10% of what it's about. the rest is about better decision making, better analytics, saving money. about doctors that know how to make better diagnoses. that's where the next wave is. that's where the action is. what we're saying is, look, industrial companies stay out of that at their own peril. it's no longer a day where you say "i'm going to make the engine and let a software guy decide how it flies." that's what we're focused on. >> rose: are there businesses that still now are in the part of g.e. that you want to spin off or do you have the core companies for the future? >> i think we've got the best portfolio we've had in a decade. financial services is a lot smaller than the last time i was on your show, for obvious reasons. but we're in the range of 60% to 70% of the country is industrial 30% to 40% is financial. that's a pretty good balance for us. so i'd say we're about where we'd like to see the company and places where we have real competitive advantage. >> rose: someone once said the way to judge g.e. executives-- this may have been one of your predecessors-- is how they allocate capital and evaluate people. do you agree with that? >> i think there are certain core competencys that go with the company that we do as a collective. capital allocation is clearly one of them. how we develop leaders is one of them. i would say there's other technology development, i would say in some ways might be as important or more important than the other two and we do that across the company and then i would say globalization. how we really globalize. globalization is a big company game. i can go to china and not be afraid. going to africa and compete with the chinese. i can go to russia and say i can manage the risk-reward equation. so that's where a lot of new consumers are and i would say that is a core competency of a multibusiness big company like g.e. so i'd say it's more than those two but those two are important. >> rose: you once said to me tell me what the global economy will look like and the domestic economy will look like and i can can tell you what g.e. will do. >> uh-huh. >> rose: look ahead to the global economy today and tell me how you see it, where it's going and pra what are the prospects for growth? >> i think the world always revolves around a couple fundamentals. one is where are the people? demographics rule. at times when the u.s. grew the fastest was times when the population was also growing the fastest. so the fact there that there's a billion new consumers joining the middle-class in the next five or ten years, you bet be with them. the second is the cost of materials so basically in in the '90s oil was $15 a barrel for a decade. now it's $80 or $100 or $120. there's a massive amount of wealth that goes with where resources go and things like that that's number two. number see there innovation. where is is the innovation taking place? is it silicon valley? bangalore? other places. so i would say demographics, natural resources, where's the innovation? that's what rules. now, in the case of aviation -- let's take that business. revenue miles are growing 4% or 5% every year because people are flying around the world. but the three biggest airlines in the world today, if you went back ten years and if i said to you the three biggest airlines are going to be emirates and qatar airlines -- >> rose: you're losing it. >> completely in another -- well not american airlines and stuff like that. so that's what -- you've got to be following those trends. now, those trends don't stay the same. in the case of the united states what's different today than ten years ago, this is a country that's rich in energy. the shale gas revolution is real. so maybe you thought your energy strategy was going to take you to africa or saudi arabia or other places. now you come right back around and bring it back here and that's meaningful. >> rose: let's talk about energy and i'll come back to the global picture. i especially want to talk about how you see africa and china and india. looking at energy today, are you in the business of nuclear reactors? >> uh-huh. >> rose: there are people saying because of these new developments in natural gas the demand for nuclear reactors will not be the same. >> uh-huh. >> rose: do you buy that? >> i think it's true. there's no one global answer so u.s. and europe and china are going to have different strategies. but the notion that in this region gas could be $2 to $3 or even $5 $6 for a million b.t.u.s shifts nuke fear this country out over a period of time. there may be a few new reactors built, but not many. >> rose: when do we have energy independence because of the online production of shale? >> here's what i would say, charlie. in other words, somebody who's smarter than i am should pick what's the right strategy. is it independence? is it security? is it something like that? but between canada, mexico, and the united states this region, the and a half a region, could be energy independent very soon. this region could probably be the most powerful or one of the most powerful energy producing regions in the world. and shale gas is just a game changer. it's just -- it's just a game changer is it a pan see yaw yah? no. but it opens up doors and that's something we should have high on the lists of things to do. >> rose: when you see that, what could disrupt that possibility of shale gas playing the role of -- that you see it? >> it exists. so in other words the seismic aspect of it is very real. it exists. what you need to commercialize it is a set of pipelines or a set of capabilities inside a country which the u.s. is pretty good at. you need some new demand. are you going to convert automobiles or other things to natural gas? then i think there's the environmental aspect. nobody wants to do this in ways that harm the environment, but there's ways to solve those problems. so i'd say if you said early on what's the biggest risk to fully developing a resource like that? it's going to be in the environmental side because i think the other things -- there's plenty of capital to solve it. >> rose: so what's the possibility for green energy and alternative energy? >> the first thing i'd say is natural gas in and of itself is inherently greener than the current base so -- >> rose: but you are -- wind -- >> i think wind will continue. i think solar will still be part of the mix. you know, again, i've always advocated for very broad energy -- set of energy solutions. because you never are quite smart enough to figure out which one is going to break through the door at any given point in time. but clearly gas is going to be a bigger part of the mix in the united states going forward. globally -- japan doesn't have any gas so they've got to figure out post-fukushima what they do. europe has to figure out do they want to import gas from russia or build nuclear -- so everybody's got their own set of challenges. but i'm here to tell you this that this country-- unlike any other time in my lifetime-- has more options that are positive than ever before. >> rose: you're bullish on america? >> i think on the energy side for sure. and i'd say on the -- the one thing that never goes away in the united states is the incredible accept of entrepreneurs. so i think if we can get a set of great entrepreneurs, we can go after some big opportunities like energy. there's no reason why the united states can't continue to grow. >> rose: can manufacturing come back to america? >> if you looked -- i'm 30 year g.e. guy. so when i started it was probably 25% of american jobs were manufacturing, now it's 9%. so it is going to go back to be 25% again? probably not. could it be in the low teens? yes. >> rose: apple just announced today -- >> i saw that. i saw what tim did. we brought jobs back to the united states. i think american work force is very productive. i think in the sets of technologies that we make today you can make them here. i actually think that the relationships in general between unions and business and things like that have all progressed over time and the work force is very productive. so there's no reason why the manufacturing base shouldn't be higher in the future and we should make that a goal? you know? in other words, this notion -- this darwinian notion that the u.s. was going to go from farms to manufacturing to service, we were the only guys reading those books, you know? the chinese had a book that said "don't read the american book. it doesn't work." >> rose: and don't read the russian book. >> so i think we can do a better job with manufacturing. i think it's quite important and it's one of the ways you create good middle-class jobs. >> rose: where the the jobs coming from? >> i think energy can provide a ton of jobs. i think housing is getting better everyday. so you're going to get some more jobs there. and i think export markets are going to continue to be pretty robust and the u.s. can play in those places. so in the short term that's where some of the jobs are going to be. but we're going to need more to get unemployment down to a level that society thinks is what the u.s. -- where the u.s. should be. >> rose: how many billions of dollars in revenue are you expecting from china? >> look, we're about seven today. it's growinging about 15% a year. we can play in china. we've got probably 16,000 or 17,000 people in china. we're a net exporter to china from the u.s. so we have good technology products and things like that. >> rose: what are they buying? >> jet engines. health care products. we'll sell more c.t. scanners in china than the united states. never thought i'd see that day. we're competitively advantaged, we do a good job. the goal is you want to be competitive in china, you want to play, but we like the portfolio, you know? we're big in australia. we're big in canada. we're big in the middle east. we're big in africa. i wouldn't want to have a strategy that was solely dependent on china. i like having a diversified geography. >> rose: in the past, you've criticized doing business in china. has it gotten better, easier, from the time you made that observation? >> at the time i made the observation it was when a thing called indigenous innovation was taking place which basically said do business with chinese companies, right? >> rose: if you want to do business here, do business with china. >> and i think companies like g.e. need to speak up from time to time when things aren't right you know? in other words, we've earned the right by and large g.e.'s relationship in china is good. we've been a good investor for a long time. we've taken a lot of heat here in new york city and washington, d.c. because we've stood tall as good, honest partner with the chinese. but what's also incumbent on you is when you've earned that position occasionally you have to speak up. and i did. >> rose: as you know, when you speak up about china people also say "look at general electric, this great american company. they're exporting jobs as well." >> we have jobs all over the world, right? so we are the second-biggest exporter behind boeing. we're a net exporter in every other country in the world. but we will sell more gas turbines -- we have a 50% market share of the large gas turbine market. we will sell more in algeria in the next three years than the united states. so what are we supposed to do? are we supposed to sit here and just say, oh, it's too hard? >> rose: and if you don't get the business somebody else will. >> somebody else is going to get it. we're down to the point after 130 years that basically we're the only american company left and most of the businesses -- love us or hate us, we're the only american left. so i think you would be better off as an american citizen wanting g.e. to be able to go to every corner of the world toe to toe compete hard then sitting here and losing market share in the places in the world that are growing. i can tell you with great certainty it is 100 times harder to get an order in angola than it is in chicago. i wish all our customers were in chicago, i really -- >> rose: (laughs) >> it would be infinitely easier. but the places where our customers are are the places and you don't do that unless you create jobs in other places at the same time. but i'm here to tell you, we're a big exporter, we'll always big a big exporter. we're a net exporter to some of the toughest places in the world and we're a good competitive american company. >> rose: like america's changing china is change. the growth rate has gone from double digits to right around 8%. they may be being stabilized now as we speak. what does that mean for china? and what does it mean for the united states? and should it change the expectations? >> i think it's good for china, actually. to a certain extent, charlie, 11%, 12% is unsustainable. you end up getting too much stimulus or you get a misallocation of resources. they're much better off working on more of a consumer-based economy less dependent on exports, driving technology and innovation harder. really the one thing that works -- state-run communism may not be your cup of tea but their government works, you know? newspaper they get things done. >> they have five-year plans. i always tell our team "read the five-year plan" which is the segment we're in. typically what they're doing makes sense in the chinese context, that's what they're doing now. the new president comes in now, mr. xi comes in, he has an agenda, they're driving environment, company reform, more consumerism, that's the right thing. for the u.s. i don't think that's a bad thing. i think we needs a relationship -- we need a strong bilateral relationship with china, we do. but if you sit back as an american business guy and say basically you're going on zero percent growth for a long time. japan has had zero percent growth for twenty years. the u.s., you're sitting at 1.5% maybe 2% g.d.p. growth. if you're not willing to get off your butt and go to every corner of the world you're going to get fired so we have to sell all over the place and china is valuable not just for china but it pulls along brazil. >> rose: then there's africa. >> i like africa. >> rose: why? >> there's eight or nine count these have an immense amount of natural resources. they must find a way to turn that into productive economies and that's starting. some of the biggest dmez have grown the last five years are in africa. so nigeria has 180 billion people. they're number six in oil, number seven in gas. they lack 40 gigawatts of power. so they have supply, they have demand of everything g.e. sells. in between it's a mess, right? in between there's a thousand things going on, nigeria. but those rethe kind of places, really, if you won't sell stuff in place for a while you better be in places like nigeria that can buy your products, have the money and you just have to drive it hard. >> rose: and the growth rate there may offer more potential than the growth rate in china. >> and i think to a certain extent -- >> rose: because the bases are so low. >> bases are low, growth rates are higher and when i go to africa there's no local competition. i'm competing with siemens and not china south rail. so i've got a different competitive mix. so we've always wanted to be big and competitive in china but our top priorities have been the resource rich countries of middle east africa, australia, canada, africa. >> rose: do you worry about how aggressive the government of china is in going to those places? >> sure. that's what i try to convey here. i try to convey when i'm in washington, look, globally we're not playing tiddlywinks here. >> rose: (laughs) >> these are tough competitors. we don't need the u.s. government to do what the government of china does. we don't. we just need the state department to have eyes open, to open up doors for caterpillar and g.e. not pick winners and losers but at the end of the day -- look, i like my chances in africa against all comers. they like the united states, they like the way we do things. we train people, we invest in countries. i like that. >> rose: on the question of what the u.s. government should do, is there anything that this government should do-- or any government, whether it's the obama administration or some future administration-- ought to do in terms of u.s. companies being more competitive internationally or? or do you want them to stand out of the way snrjts look, i think they can be -- i don't think we need the same levels of investment support that even germany and japan have. but the fact that secretary clinton has been very pro business, that the state department opens up doors, that the president publicly says i want to double exports, that the u.s. is very aggressive in trying to do that, i think attitude helps us all. it's really a -- you know, when chancellor merkel flies from berlin to beijing, 20 c.e.o.s get off right behind her and they've got their hands out, right? and they're saying "give me more business." and we don't need to do it exactly that way but we need the administration, every administration, to be out there selling with us as we go around the world. look, for every job that we have in export there is's another eight in the supply chain. every small and medium supplier benefits as we go sell. >> rose: you mentioned the president. you have developed -- how would you characterize the relationship? you're on the jobs and you're on the debt commission, he clearly respects you. what's the relationship? >> i think strong -- very strong mutual respect. phenomenon a way that we can communicate and things like that. so i say deep personal respect. >> rose: and if he would call you up and say "i need you for my second term"? >> i'd say i've had the honor of serving you already, mr. president, and it's a good time to -- >> rose: but it's hard to turn the president down. >> i think he's going to have a very deem bench and my strong commitment is to g.e. >> rose: you're going to evade the question. (laughs) >> exactly. (laughs) exactly. >> rose: but your sense of him -- some people speculate that you were disappointed in the way he handled the economy. >> here's what i would say. i think he became president at a very tough time, right? 2008. and i would say it was at a time when business wasn't at its peak right? it was a time when business was highly disliked, coming out of the financial crisis. >> rose: both wall street and -- >> everybody really. i just think we all got painted with whatever brush was out there. >> rose: but was he part of that in a sense? >> he inherited it when he came in. i think, you know -- and i think we have to take 50% of the blame in responsibility in that i think business guys would have liked to have seen maybe different priorities at times. >> rose: like what? you're on the round table, too. >> working harder on the regulatory front. some thingser have very us is health care. but i sit here and say, look, came in at a tough time, a time when business was viewed as part of the problem, not part of the solution. we've gotten to where we are today. i think business deserves its share of the blame and when i worked with him on the jobs council, i think on specifics he was fantastic and was a great listener, was highly engaged with the work the jobs council did. took actions on the recommendations we put forward and, you know, that's more or less what i judge. i really think, charlie, you know, there are plenty of people that are mean to c.e.o.s. you know, in other words we don't need to be patted on the head like "good boy, i really like you" and stuff like that. that's not really -- in the end we like growth and competitiveness and we like people that help us work on growth and competitiveness. >> rose: and this president helps you work on growth and competitiveness? >> and i think in a second term we can do a lot. >> rose: what is your hope for the second term? and first before we go there let's go to the fiscal cliff. what do you think ought to come out of an agreement between the president and john boehner? >> i make a couple comments. the first one is we've got to get this done now. not -- you know, there are people that will write or go on news shows and say we can let it lapse two weeks or something like that. that is specifically not true. we need this to get resolved now. not because jim mcinernie will say it. but because the people who work for us, their lives are in flux. and this is encredibly critical we get it done now. we need revenue. everybody knows we need rev. >> rose: so the president is right in asking for more revenue and not extending the bush tax cuts for $250,000? >> bowles simpson, there's not been one commission that says we can do this on spending cuts. i think speaker boehner is the only guy that can lead us in that. >> rose: he's got to take the republican house of representatives -- >> he's got to take the deal and i trust he can do it. >> rose: you're urging him to do it? to take the deal and allow increase in the rates -- >> we're trying to get them to do a market credible deal in his own way. i don't think we want to negotiate for him. i think that helps the president. really what i would say is we trust speaker boehner to do it and he shouldn't spend one minute using political capital to keep my rates low. in other words -- but i trust him. he's a good guy and he can get this done. >> rose: and you trust the president. >> i trust as well. he's been extremely focused and clear that he thinks we need entitlement reform and we need to get on it in a meaningful way. so you've got two guys that have to negotiate things that are both hard for their bases and they have to do it more or less in realtime and they have to do it now. what i say, charlie, coming out of this in the future is we need tax reform. you know if the forecasts of the c.b.o. is that the economy grows 3.5% for the next ten or 15 years, today we're growing 1.5%. >> rose: exactly. >> if that 3.5% is 2.5%, we still have a $4 trillion problem. >> rose: over ten years. >> over ten years. so we need to be working on things to drive growth and competitiveness as time goes on. >>. >> rose: and what is it that drives growth and competitiveness? >> i think simplification of corporate tax reform. >> rose: right. >> i think really looking at regulatory structures, educational structures, things like that. >> rose: but that costs money. >> i needs to be revisited. the look, i think we've got to get kind of the $4 trillion thing behind us and then -- but it's not like the government shouldn't invest in anything one of the things that has come out of every jobs council i've been a part of that is almost universal until the b.r.t. is that that this country needs to invest in infrastructure. this is something that the president and the b.r.t., jobs councils, all agree but it runs into problems because what's -- the funding structure going to be? how do we pay for it and things like that? >> rose: that's the potential for growth and growth is the essential thing. build the infrastructure, build the education. >> anybody doesn't that doesn't think once we do this four trillion dollar down payment that growth isn't the most important thing is crazy. so that's what we have to be looking at for broader tax reform. >> rose: and simpson-bowles is a good guideline? >> i think simpson-bowles is a great starting point. like i said, you've got two guys who have to make this happen and we should do whatever we can to make their jobs more straightforward. >> rose: for whose who say we can go over the fiscal cliff and it might not be such a bad thing, you say in >> i think that say they're people that don't have anybody that works for them we haven't been on this for two weeks or two days or two months. we've been work thong for two and a half years. what happened in july of 2011 was ugly. i read stories now that say the president lost or he shouldn't have done this or speaker boehner done that. they both failed. nobody won on that moment in time. it made us -- it hurt us inside the country, it hurt us outside the country. so i would say if this goes into next year we ought to consider that failure. we ought to get these guys to do a deal that they know they can do and we have to get them do it now. this is not just jeff immelt speaking, the business community almost universally speaks with one voice and that needs to get done now and moving it to next year is failure. >> rose: i don't know of any c.e.o. who knows more about the world because of how much you travel and how many countries you have business in. what's the impression of the united states in those countries? because you immediate with the leaders of these countries as well as their establishment. what are they saying about us? clearly they're saying get your financial house in order. >> so i think the first thing is they like president obama. they just do. he is a beloved figure in almost every corner of the world. i would start with that. and secretary clinton they are highly respected, highly admired in every corner of the world and that helps. there's nothing wrong with that. number two, i would say american entrepreneurship and capitalism is still the model that people want. the third thing i'd say is the politics in the u.s. as seen from afar are ugly, are brutally ugly. and -- >> rose: they wonder why america can't deal with its problems and has gridlock in washington? >> i think people look at that and say this is a country that's so admired. why can't we do -- why can't people just compromise and get along and things like that. i would go beyond that to say the dollar is the reserve currency. every american benefits from that. every american. 300 million plus of us all benefit from the fact that we're the reserve currency. now, you know yoshgs default on your debt or you lose your debt ratings a few times, that's not going to be the case. and you lose that in a minute. that isn't something that erodes over a decade. so we can't take that for granted. that is an important aspect. >> rose: what do you think they want us to do in terms of the exercise of american power? >> you know, geopolitics in military -- there are other people that you're going to interview that are smarter about that than i am. but let me make a point on job creation and economics. i want on a mission with senator mccain and senator kerry in tunisia and egypt in the summer of 2011. they need jobs. russia needs jobs. china needs jobs. brazil needs jobs. >> rose: america needs jobs. >> vietnam needs jobs. america needs jobs. that is the currency of power today is innovation, is economics: and i say this, there's a ton of people that disagree. anybody no matter where you are, china any place else, you root for a weak america at your own peril. we are the biggest market. i don't think people root against our market so american power gets elevated when our economy does better. when we're creating our own jobs. when we're self-confident again. so that brings me back to, you know, the president's second term. this is an incredibly smart, tough-minded good leader. i think people, maybe even c.e.o.s like me way underestimated this guy. but in the second term i think we all need to work together to drive competitiveness and economic growth that i think that will help our geopolitics, it will help the mood of the nation and i think the president recognizes that. i hope he does, i think he does. >> rose: let me nail that down. you seem to be saying this is a smart guy, this is a guy that's admired around the world. this is a guy that was dealt a bad hand with the economy and this is a guy going into the second term and therefore you say to your business leaders around -- part of the round table and other important business institutions, you're saying how do we figure out how to support this guy in terms of supporting america? that's your message? >> i think that's the way we all feel. >> rose: and don't be so down on him -- >> the day after election i still have 300,000 people working for me the next day. so you have to get up and say hey, let's go. business guys have short memories and it's what happens next is much more important than what's happened last and we all believe that. my experience with the president is look -- let's take financial services. i personally think that nobody in the world copies our regulators anymore in this country. nobody, because they view them as being complicated, overlapping and things like that. >> rose: nobody around the world designing their regulatory for chair company looks to america as their model. >> so i come to the president and say, look, we need to reform the e.p.a. he's going to disagree with that. but when we came to the jobs council and said here's 30 and 35035 big infrastructure projects that if we can move the psychle from seven years to one year we can create jobs. he approved them all and made them happen. we have to look for small victorys that don't take on these deep philosophical divides and makes the country more competitive. and i think in that regard the president is an exceptional problem solver in dealing with specifics. we made 60 recommendations on the job council that required executive order, we did 54. we made 30 recommendations on things that took legislation, we did four. okay? >> rose: but the comment is heard occasionally the president believes that government ought to do the job rather than the private sector and you're here saying that the president is not of that persuasion? that wants the private sector to do what he can? >> i think the president knows that the private sector has a -- if you want to try growth and competitiveness, if that's the problem you're trying to solve, unfortunately -- you may not like us today but you have to work with us. i think the president recognizes that. i just think the point is if you make a frontal assault and it doesn't matter -- you can take on anybody on stuff that people philosophically believe in, they're not going to say yes on day one. but that doesn't mean we should -- there are dozens of things we can and should engage in where the president will engage. and, by the way, charlie, at the end of the day what you want me doing is selling jet engines. we're having a nice dialogue, but this is not the way i want to spend time and not the way you want me to spend my time. >> rose: indeed. let me me go to your tenure at the company for a few minutes. there's no longer nbc. there's no longer insurance. there's no longer plastics. there is a g.e. capital that is much -- give me a sense of what you felt like you had to change and why in the last ten years. >> i'd say the world of competitiveness always changes and the world of opportunity also changes. so in the case of businesses like insurance, i didn't think we were very good. i remember the 9/11 tragedy and we took a billion dollar write in our insurance business and i was going through this incredible time and for the writeoff we took premiums of like $7 million. and i was like note to self, get out of insurance. >> rose: (laughs) the math didn't work. >> so i think each disposition we just felt like that competitiveness nature changed and then we took that capital and when i was -- first became c.e.o. our oil and gas business was a $500 million business. now it's a $15 or $16 million business. our aviation business doubled in size. health care business is bigger. so we redeploy and get ourselves into businesses we think are better for where the future is going to go. >> rose: g.e. capital. do you take some of the blame for how significant g.e. happenal has become? >> sure. the mistake i made was i let it become too big. our writeoffs -- now you have to benefit of looking back five years. we didn't do exotic bus the mistake i made is we let it get too big in terms of the relative size and the prospect of the company. >> rose: what are the lessons to be learned from the subprime crisis and the economic crisis this country had to go through? >> listen harder. listen and just be more -- i'd say -- i'd make two comments, charlie. the first is a macro comment. brazil is a great place. the c.e.o.s in brazil are my friends, they're quite good. if you ask a c.e.o. of brazil how did you become so good he'd say because i was c.e.o. from 1990 to 1995, inflation was like 100% a day, i used to bring cash to the bank in a gym bag and i became better because of those years. >> rose: you learn lessons in hard times. >> so you may not like us but your c.e.o.s were better than they were in 2007 and 2008. number one. number two, humility ask better questions and listen harder. in retrospect if you look at the amount of leverage we added to the american system between the 1990s and 2000, the fact that we had a -- the global economy is $60 trillion, the market for credit default swaps was $65 trillion, unregulated, probably not the right way to go. we just -- as a system of which g.e. was a part we just didn't ask tough enough questions and we didn't push hard enough. and you know what? in financial services do i like everything that's happened from a financial standpoint? no, but we should keep our mouth shut and that's where we are. >> rose: fair enough. i hear you, you deserved it because you let things get out of hand because there was no regulation or regulation that was there one enforced. but you're dissatisfied with dodd-frank? u.s. economy. it's below 2%. smart people say to me -- >> i think there's all kinds of theories. i sit back and say what are the fundamentals are demographics, productivity, innovation, energy. so we need to let the population grow. we need immigration reform. we need to capture energy. that might be worth the point of g.d.p. we need to have an entrepreneurial structure that's not impaired by regulations and things like that. i think if you do those things you'll get growth back to 3.5% and the arithmetic doesn't work at 2% g.d.p. growth. none of this arithmetic works. we can put speaker boehner and the president in a dungeon for a year, they're not going to solve it at 2% -- >> rose: if g.d.p. is 2%. >> completely. >> rose: stock price. what was the stock price when you took over? >> in the high 30s. >> rose: it's now what? >> about 21 bucks. >> rose: what do you attribute that to? >> the p.e. has gone from a 50 plus p.e. to a 12. >> rose: why? >> i think, charlie, the financial service industry probably -- our g.e. capital probably had a market cap in and of itself that was $20 a share, $15 to $20 a share. so in general all p.e.s have come down and if you've been in financial services over the last decade you have gotten hammered and i think those two things have done as much to contribute -- look, we are -- have expanded earnings in a very good trajectory out of the crisis, 2013, 2012 will probably be the fourth-best year in the company's history. 2013 will be better. so it's never been -- >> rose: then the market doesn't get the future of g.e.? >> look, i just think -- >> rose: they've assigned you a pe that's real or unreal? >> we are in a p.e. that probably trades at a premium to our peers. right? so sometimes you trade at a 50, sometimes you trade at a 12. i wish i could control -- i -- 50 was more fun. >> rose: (laughs) >> but 12 is where we are. 12 is where we are today. (laughs) so that's -- in the end the best thing doing for g.e. investors is grow earnings and cash flow, which we've done, distribute cash. our dividends have been good and growing again and these things get sorted out as time goes on. >> rose: because of the world that i know why did you sell nbc >> i just -- we ran out of good ideas. we're an operating company, not a holding company. when i go to an oil and gas review i have a thousand ideas. when i see our health care business i have 1500 good ideas. at the end of nbc i would say "make better shows and buy more cable." which wasn't good. i didn't have 523 good ideas, i had two. so i think you have to be self-reflective and i haven't regretted it a minute. i have tremendous respect and love and admiration for people in the business. >> rose: it wasn't your management but the nature of the business? or was it your management? >> i think -- we did "harry potter," we did the olympics, we did the n.f.l., we did cable. all those things for investment we made. >> rose: this had a good ride for you. you love the job. the hardest thing i assume was the dividend announcement and not meeting expectations for a quarter. how -- what do you wake up and say when you know you have to make that call? >> i'd say cutting the g.e. dividend was the worst day of my life. i just hated myself. i was -- i felt like i had let so many people down. i said i wouldn't do it. i was so incredibly disappointed in myself. i'll never forget it, charlie, as long as i live, but it was what i had to do for the company that n that moment in time. the strength will to get up the next day and to face your tame with a smile on your face, quiet confidence and go forward, that's why we have these jobs. in the good days they're not that hard to manage. i've got a ton of good people that work for me that could run g.e. in the good days. it's the bad days where you need somebody to step up and take the heat and it's seared in my soul and investors should know that i will work my butt off for the rest of my life in -- really i think you can make people -- you know, if you don't make the tough decision at the right time you're going to lose your company but if you make it and persevere, people loo l like you -- >> rose: maybe not that day but someday. >> you're going to have one day -- if you do these jobs a long time you'll have one or two days where everybody hates you. >> rose: do you want to do this for a long time? >> i have a high motor for it. i love the company. i'm completely committed. there will be a right time to leave. the board and i talk about that. but for now i have a pagts for the job and i love the company. >> rose: we've talked about chinese leaders who look -- leader after leader, they set in the motion. have you done that at g.e.? >> yeah, for sure. >> rose: you know who your heir might be? >> we have a list of folks. if something happened to me we know who would be the leader. we know leader when you luke look out three, five, ten years, who's around. we have a great bench. we're a company where nobody's name is above the door. this is a company where the company comes first. everybody that walks through the door at g.e. knows 24 hours a day seven days a week for as long as you work here the company comes first. >> rose: what's the most important lesson you have learned that you might to go back to the harvard business school and say in the last ten years i came to a job and i came at a perilous moment to the nation's psyche and i look now in 2011, we've got financial challenges but it's a remarkable country. this is what i want to teach you that i have one last opportunity to talk to future business leaders about what it means to be a business leader in 2013. >> i think it's humility and the curiosity that comes with it. in other words, the big mistakes you make is when you stop asking questioning but if you're hungry and humble and you're always digging for that extra piece of knowledge that's how the world works. >> rose: and where do you find that? how do you go about making sure you are reremember inishing at every moment your own awareness. not just with knowledge -- >> travel constantly. see people constantly. work retail. charlie, look -- >> rose: work retail. >> i see you occasionally at the microsoft conference or stuff like that. i'm there to learn. i'm there to work retail. i've now done this 11 years. i've been in every c.e.o.s' office. i'm on the road 60% of the time. i don't go to a lot of conferences i do retail and i work it hard. i think you have to have your mind open. you have to be curious. you have to be getting input from 22-year-olds as well as 62-year-olds. and you have to have a high motor for all of that and you have to be -- you can't sit back and say gosh these real estate values are awfully high. i hope nothing bad happens. (laughter) or, you know, nervous laughter is a bad strategy and i think the more humble you can be and the more curious you can be, those are the traits of exexceptionally successful. >> rose: is there skill you wish you'd had that you had to learn to acquire? >> one thing c.e.o.s never know when they get the job is just context. it's how you fit with the world and that's something you can only learn the hard way and it's hard to teach. when i became c.e.o. of g.e. i knew how to run a company and businesses. i was a pretty good business guy. but it's not until you're alone that you understand how your company fits with the world. that's a continuous process and you go through these economic times that you've had the last decade and it's just -- i think the difference so few things you wake up one morning and fukushima disaster has taken place, right? now the night before i went to bed i wasn't thinking about japan. i wasn't thinking about nuclear power. now it's all consuming. it seems like we're in a period of time that's volatile from a geopolitical standpoint. volatile from an environment, nature standpoint. you better be a business leader that's fast on your feet or else you won't do very well. >> rose: when i talk to political leaders especially and i say what have you learned? they say it's relationships. relationships in the end make a huge difference. it's trust, you see it at -- on the part of presidents, you see in the terms of people i've talked to, been secretary of state, secretary of defense. bill gates, a very good secretary of defense, -- bob gates said to me you need quickly to cultivate and devote time to relationships because you realize you're in this together. >> completely agree. and i would say if anything the pendulum is coming back hardener that direction. >> rose: meaning what? >> meaning coming out of the crisis. i think there's less trust in general. >> rose: it's part of the job in washington. so you value relationship very much and so there are hundreds of c.e.o.s that i know who i can pick up the phone and they trust g.e. and they trust g.e. because they know me or my team and i think that's immensely valuable and i think in the end it's important that business leaders and politicians have a better sense of trust than maybe what we've had over the last five years and, again, those things never work unless you assume you're 50% of the problem. that's what you've got to -- >> rose: assume you're 50% of the problem? in other words -- >> i'm not blameless. >> there's two kinds of advice you can give. this is what i try to do. one is here's what under do and the other is here's what i would do if i were you. >> rose: (laughs) >> turns out the later is a hundred times more valuable than the form every. >> rose: you say to him "here's what i would do if i was you" because he knows you are giving it the most crucial analysis because it affects you directly. >> and people are never going to believe this, charlie. but believe it or not the 25 people that worked on the job council weren't there selling for business, they were there legitimately trying to help the country. and it is possible to be global c.e.o. and still love your country and i can thank that paradox. it's not always easy but i can manage that paradox. >> rose: you're glad you took those jobs? >> i really am. i'm not saying that it was easy but i really like the people on the council. i met -- we had a number of small business people, a woman named darlene miller, i love knees guys. i thought they were awesome. i got to know paul and ellen. you know, we're not going to be -- have a dinner together every night. but -- >> rose: but you can understand where he comes from. >> for where rich coming from and who his constituents are. so i think that was very valuable and like i said i think at a tough time we're able to make a small difference and that's where we're trying to do. >> rose: we're all in the same boat. >> yeah. >> rose: jeff immelt, c.e.o. of general electric. thank you for joining us. see you next time. rose communications captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org >> this is nbr. captioning sponsored by wpbt >> susie: i'm susie gharib. a key democrat talks about medicare cuts that could be part of a fiscal cliff deal. we talk with maryland congressman chris van hollen. >> tom: i'm tom hudson. two hurricanes in two years for the northeast-- a region not used to big storms comes to terms with the cleanup and cost. >> susie: and it's green monday, one of the most popular days for online shoppers. we've got details.
PBS
Dec 11, 2012 12:00pm PST
hurricane sandy. further progress will be tested as the fiscal cliff deadline approaches without a deal inside yet. i'm very pleased to have jeff immelt back on this program. welcome >> charlie, thanks, good to be back with you. >> rose: we've talked many times about g.e. since you took over, i think once since -- just after 2001. where is the company today in terms of where do you want it to be and where do you want it to be in the next five years? >> i think, charlie, what we've tried to do is simplify the portfolio into infrastructure and financial services. we like where the portfolio is today. we think in the infrastructure space there's going to be roughly $4 trillion spent each year, so it's an attractive big market. globally is where our opportunities are so the company's -- probably a decade ago 30% of our revenues were outside the united states. now it's more like 60% or 65%. so we think we've got the portfolio we want. we've dramatically increased the amount of technology. and in the end i think technology and innovation are the competitive advantage. we've got a good global
PBS
Dec 10, 2012 2:30pm PST
woodruff. on the newshour tonight, we'll update negotiations aimed at avoiding the fiscal cliff. >> ifill: then, we look at michigan's debate over right-to- work laws which would prevent labor unions from requiring membership.
PBS
Dec 5, 2012 4:00pm PST
right now, the issue consuming both political parties in the u.s. is in the fiscal cliff. in britain today, the finance minister george osborn was forced to defend his policy of austerity in the light of economic growth. >> when georgia osborn when to address the house of commons from the british economy -- on the british economy, he had to read mcvet is taking much longer than in must got to balance -- he had to admit it is taking much habrÉ than it osborn when o address was first thought to balance the nation's books. >> the people want to know that we are making progress, and the message today is that we are making progress. it is a hard road, but we are getting there. >> he pointed to the economic problems globally that are making his job harder. as a result, the chancellor announced austerity would have to last for logger, until 2018, in fact. that means more benefits will now be squeezed, and there will be a tax rates on the pension pops. >> i know these tax measures willthought to balance not be r. ways to reduce the deficit never are. but we must act together. when you look
PBS
Dec 7, 2012 8:00pm PST
the fiscal cliff? >> oh, absolutely. gwen: behind the scenes -- tea party pressure, as the movements most prominent senator builds a new platform. >> a lot of my role in the senate has been stopping bad things and saying no to bad things, but we need to do more than that gwen: abroad, tensions in syria on the rise. can the u.s. intervene? should we? covering the week -- jackie calmes of "new york times," eamon javers of cnbc, amy walter of abc news, and james kitfield of "national journal." >> award-winning reporting and analysis covering history as it happens. live from our nations capitol, this is washington week with gwen ifill, produced in association with national journal. corporate funding for washington week is provided by -- ♪ >> wherever our trains go, the economy comes to life. norfolk southern. one line, infinite possibilities. >> we know why we're here. to charlotte a greater path, in the air and in our factories. >> to find cleaner, more efficient ways to power flight. >> and harness our technology for new energy solutions. >> around the globe, the people of boeing are
PBS
Dec 11, 2012 6:00pm PST
our economy gets to the fiscal cliff. now, if the president doesn't agree with our approach, he's got an obligation to put forward a plan that can pass both chambers of the congress. because right now the american people have to be scratching their heads and wondering when is the president going to get serious? >> on that question of whether or not we have put forward specific spending cuts, the answer is is we have. not only that, we signed law a trillion dollars in specific spending cuts. so if you combine what is signed into law with what we proposed versus the total absence of any specificity from the republicans for a single dollar in revenue, i think in the battle of specificity, the outcome has already been decided. >> woodruff: and a short time ago an administration official told us the president and the speaker spoke by phone this evening. now to our series of conversations on this subject and what should be done. we've listened to a range of opinions in recent days, including erskine bowles of the simpson-bowles commission; prize-winning economist paul krugman; the c.e.o. of
PBS
Dec 5, 2012 12:00am PST
with president obama today about what they need to see in a fiscal cliff deal. we talk with delaware governor jack markell. >> susie: i'm susie gharib. a coalition of the nation's top c.e.o.s is feeling pessimistic about getting a fiscal cliff deal.
PBS
Dec 8, 2012 12:00am PST
david byrne. >> i thought i can do this. i can communicate this way. but i also felt at that point and i think probably a lot of artists and musicians feel this, we want to over throw whatever the reigning order of music is at that time, not violently just what is successful now, most of it doesn't mean anything to us. we have to make our own music, we have to make music for our generation, for our friends. >> rose: right. >> and it is not -- we are going to wipe the slate clean. >> rose: gustavo dudamel and david byrne when we continue. funding for charlie rose was provided by the following. captioning sponsored by rose communications from our studios in new york city, this is charlie rose. >> rose: maestro gustavo dudamel is here, berlin philharmonic once called him the most astonishingly talented conductor industry ever come across. he is beloved bolivar orchestra in vendz well, ven venezuela anw is with the la philharmonic. ♪ >> rose: he is in new york to, bolivar orchestra in carnegie called, voices from latin america, also dedicated further musical education and social justice around the world, i am pleased to have gustavo dudamel at this table for the first time. >> thank you. it is an honor. >> rose: my pleasure. >> huge honor. >> rose: we have been wanting to do this for a while. tell me about the music you have selected for the performance. >> yes. this is a festival called dos americas here in new york, and we decide to bring, you know, this amazing music that we have, this very latin, in a ways of irs stick but deep music by es at the vek, villalobos, by ar bon, carlos chavez, so for us it is very important to show the soul of our music also, also to play the strauss ballad, but especially, you know, our music. >> rose: tell me about the music of venezuela. >> well, look, what we are bringing is the -- i think it is the most important piece right in venezuela, by michael estevez and a piece for a big choir, two soloist, a tenor and a baritone. >> a huge orchestra, you can feel what is about our culture, you know the horrors, the importance of -- the importance of the land, of the place, of the -- all of the -- the big readers that connect not only venezuela but connect venezuela with columbia, with brazil, it is amazing of. >> rose: you feel some sense of responsibility because of the position you hold now around the world. >> uh-huh. >> rose: to introduce the world to latin-american music. >> absolutely, of course. but look. for us the most important thing is to put our music in the same level of, how to say, of importance, of as, especially talking about modern composers because when we talk about our music, we are talking about music of the 20th century, and especially 20th century, villalobos, estevez,jarbon and that is important. i was thinking this, this is all new music for many people. >> rose: yes, exactly. >> it is old music. the concerts are sold out. you know, it is something very special, because people are coming, you know, with this kind of question, you know, with this kind of, what will we listen? but i think at the same time they think that it would be something very special, for us the most important thing is not -- of course it is the orchestra from where i am coming but the music, how important is this music, to bring this music for people that are not close to that. >> rose: how -- how was it founded. >> it was founded by maestros, in 1975, i think, started as a program for young musicians. we have a great orchestra in venezuela, the orchestra similar gone a devenezuela. >> symphony devenezuela but it is only one orchestra and not possible for the young students to be alive through music. it was only to study music and to see the possibility, the possibilities to have a job, by a miracle, really by a miracle, and what he did was to create this youth orchestra, and it was a dream, because it was crazy for many people, it was a crazy guy bringing young people, venezuelan to play classical music and he started with 11 and he thought, oh, my god, what is this about, only 11 musicians? at the end, he had 70. and when they played the first concert they have only 20 musicians but now after almost 40 years, we are talking about 400,000 young children, people. >> rose: do you take special joy in either conducting or playing and introducing music to young people? >> i think for me it is the most important thing. >> rose: to make sure they -- >> you know, because this is my background. i grew up -- i was five years old when i started, but i always say that i started before, because my father started in the sistema in the seventies, and music was around my life all the time, it was like -- i think -- i don't know how to say, but what i remember, to remember when you are two or three years old, it is very difficult, but what i remember the most is music, in my father's study or studying, and then i wanted to be a musician, and studying with, you know, children of my same age, doing music, playing, it is my life, and that is why for me so important to give the message of the power of music for young and for children. >> rose: but do you feel like you chose music or music chose you? >> i was in love with music, i really -- i didn't understood anything, really, but i loved it, to listen, and i love it to read when i was three or four years old, i remember a little book of my father's, soul fish of sailfish. small book. it was amazing. i remember. >> rose: yes. >> the smell of the book and i opened it and i was reading this black-white things there and my father saw that, wow, we have to do something with this, not only with this smell of the book but also with -- >> rose: and how long after that did you say, what i really want to do is conduct? >> well, this part of my life is really funny, because i wanted to play the trombone, and -- but the trombone was too big for me, and my arm was too short, we didn't have a small trombone, now you get the chance to have one and you can play. >> rose: on such matter music changes. >> yes. >> rose: your size did not lend itself to the trombone. >> no. and i was studying theory, you know, harm know, counter point, soul fish, aesthetic music, all of that, even composition, until i was nine years old, eight, and no, no, no, because i started to play the violin when i was nine, but i went to my first concert when i was seven years old. >> rose: yes. >> and my father was playing, i remember, by korsakov. >> and for me it was like, wow, what is this guy doing there, you know, moving his hands and everything? >> rose: in command too. >> exactly. >> rose: sitting there and all of these musicians. >> exactly. following, giving. i asked my grandmother for a gift for my birthday that was a baton. >> rose: a baton? >> yes. and she bought for me, and my favorite game was to conduct the recordings. i remember an lp of chicago symphony conducted by daniel -- lp beautiful with tchaikovsky music, slave march, it it will, italiano, 1812, all of that and i was rehearsing and stopping the recording to say this is loud, this needs to go down, again. i destroyed the lp, i remember, but i was giving my concert with my little toys there in front. and that was the beginning. and it was a very serious game. i remember -- >> rose: you took it seriously? >> you cannot imagine how serious it was. there was silence in my house. my house was, i know, 45 square meters. i don't know my grandparents, my parents, but it was beautiful atmosphere, and i was saying to them, you have zero to sit now and you have to listen to my concert. oh, yo you have to stop becausei am rehearsing now and that was my life, i was dreaming, you know, after school to go back to home and to get my toys and to do my rehearsal until i was 11 years old and the conductor of the orchestra where i was playing, he was late, this was -- >> ah. >> and he was late, and, well,. >> rose: there you were. >> exactly. imitating, because we started that rehearsal, i was imitating, famous conductor, and local conductors, and he is like this, and then we started to work and i became, you know, assistant conductor immediately of this orchestra. >> rose: this is from a wonderful piece bob simon did for 60 minutes showing you conducting a youth orchestra in la. >> uh-huh. >> rose: during a practice. here it is. >> on saturdays all the kids get together in an orchestra. today we were there, so was gustavo, who has been conducting youth orchestras back in venezuela since he was 13 and has his own way to get musicians to understand the music. >> what do you want to play first? >> ah, okay. one, and -- no, no, no, tempo, together. la, la, la. la, la, la. it is like a man talking to a girl, you know. la, la, la re fa. >> do re mi. >> maybe. okay. none of these kids knew anything about classical music before they came here. but gustavo knows that the program does a lot more than teach music, it builds character, discipline and teamwork. and he keeps kids off the streets. >> it is how we started, i remember this overture, would play, you know, i play as a child, and it is amazing, because to see the transformation of these children, not because of the rehearsal, it is because the power of music, how it can change the life, and what you cannot see there is the parents, the families, around sitting and they were, you know, first approval all the time, yes, yes. no. yes. i would like -- my god. there is something magical that is happening, and it is the music that is there. the results of what is all of this idea about, when you are conducting, what does your mind's eye see? >> sometimes i am thinking of many things when i am conducting, and it is a very special kind of concentration. i don't know. in general, i conduct by memory. >> rose: you do? why do you do it that way? >> well, i don't think that it is a special talent. i think, you know, conductors conduct really well, the best way with the music in front and some of the conductor i am not the only one that conducts by memory, but i feel more connected to the music and i feel more -- not just connected to the music but connected to the musicians, and i don't know. sometimes it is crazy when i -- when i finish a concert, and i think, well, i was thinking on this. sometimes i am thinking on other pieces but it is not an ability. it is something simple. it is the brain that -- >> rose: does it just happen or are you thinking as the score is in your head? >> uh-huh. >> rose: this happens and then this happens and this happens? and this note and this note and then i bring in this section? >> yes. >> rose: are you thinking all of those things or does it simply once you begin it is almost just flows out of you? >> it is a structure of what you think. of course you are so concentrate, but the problem is not -- it is not like you read a book and you know every word of the book, it is not the way. it has to be very natural. and yesterday, you know, i was talking to a young conductor and he was asking me -- >> rose: a conductor younger than you? >> yes, a very young one, very talented, 16 years old conductor from venezuela, and he was asking me, i am having problems with this because i cannot memorize. and i said, if you have a problem, then stop and see the thing as a big structure because you cannot memorize a piece. you know, in pressure, like i have to, i have to, because this would be a problem. >> rose: right. >> you will never memorize the piece. so rest, sometimes you don't have to conduct the first time without the score, but with time you are conducting with the music. you needless and less and less the score, and then you conduct by memory. and then it is like the brain is a muscle. >> rose: you are going to announce today a foundation. >> yes. >> rose: what is the foundation? >> it is to keep, you know, giving the message of music. >> rose: the power and the message of music? >> to help develop more the message, and this programs of sistema happens in los angeles, in scotland, in sweden, in korea, in italy, in germany, not only los angeles in the states but it is happening in a lot of programs inspired by sistema, it is only to help that, you know, to develop the idea of music as a human right. >> rose: yes. >> it is a -- well, like this guy is talking about something really crazy. but i think art has to be an element of society, to be better citizens, to be a better human beings, we are not talking about something new. wwe can go back, you know, in times, you know, when art was an element, an essential element of the men. and that is something that we need in this -- >> rose: it speaks to who we are and what we want to become. >> exactly. especially in in very cultivated world where -- >> rose: yeah. >> where we have to build something better, something more sensible for -- >> rose: when you accepted the job at the la philharmonic, why there? >> one of my first commitments was at los angeles, after i won the competition,. i remember invited me. >> rose: the then conductor. >> exactly. the music director at that time. and in 2005 i went there and the second time was in 2006 i was conducting bartok orchestra, dances, and fema was playing concerto and i remember a group of the orchestra came to me, it was so beautiful, because i was 25 years old, and they came and they said, wow, we love to work with you, we love for you to come more often to the orchestra, and i was in a way, i think they were telling me, cane, we are thinking -- >> rose: it would be a wonderful marriage between you and us? >> and it was not decision the, it was not difficult, the decision. i think los angeles is a very special place to do things, important things, in many ways, community, the community is something very important, look what is happening. i started to be the music director of the orchestra, and the first thing was the youth orchestra, so amazing that for our orchestra, hike los angeles philharmonic, a legendary orchestra conducted by giulani. >> getting the opportunity and thinking of the children, and the future of the community, building an orchestra, inspired by sistema which is something hike, oh, thank you, wonderful, you know, that is to be a advice nation about what to do with what we do. bring in a new audience. it is very important that we build the future audience, not only to do, you know, the normal problem like -- no, we have a problem that snot created from me, but from years ago which is the green umbrella, for example that is about new music, you cannot imagine how these concerts of complete new music are sold out, so we are talking about a community that is hungry, you know, to have more and more. and i feel that in los angeles, from the first time, even my first concert was at the hollywood bowl, and there were, i don't know, 10,000 people listening to the concert, it was not full, because it was for 18,000, but to see an audience of 10,000 people listening to a concert is a, classical music concert, that is something. so that is -- >> rose: you heard simon said in my introduction to you. >> well that is not true. (laughter.) >> rose: but let's assume it is. what is it that you have, you think? i mean, what distinguishes here from here? i mean, help me understand your own sort of understanding, i am not asking you to pat yourself on the back. i am asking you to help us understand what it is that you have found within yourself to give. >> i don't know. i don't know. i think -- i think, you know, it is the love of what i do, you know, and that is not a secret. you know, music for me is my life, and when i am not, you know, doing what i am doing i don't feel happy. >> rose: yes. >> , you know,? and that means something, you know, that means that music is a very important element of my life, and a natural element. i think we are a new generation. and talking about young conductors, i am not the only young conductor in the world, there are many tall lened conductors, you know, doing a great career right now, and i see more, a big responsibility for us. really, charlie, i don't feel as a special person. >> rose: right. >> honestly. i feel really -- that i am a musician, and i am a part of the okay virginia i never feel like i am the leader and i am conducting to you and you have to follow me, no. i feel that i am one more musician of the orchestra, and maybe that is something special that people feel, you know, that, you know, is not an element distracting the music and what the orchestra is doing. it is only .. an element. >> rose: and when we watch you with the baton, are we seeing what the music is doing to you at that moment? i mean, are you simply taking it? and, taking it in and that's where the direction comes from the score? >> yes. absolutely. it is the music. it is the music. it is the music. i study a lot, really, and i study scores, you know, i love to go deeply in music. >> rose: when you study the score, what are you looking for what is it that speaks to you? >> what speaks to me? >> rose: is it knowing where the composer's head was, where he or she was thinking at the moment, getting to what might have been. >> yes. >> -- at the moment that that note was taken from this head and this heart and put there on that page? >> just think from that point, but at the end, remember that you are recreating. >> rose: yes. >> you are recreating. so sometimes let's put the stamp of the tobin, the tobin is a composer very difficult to approach, because it rules in the music. you have to use a small orchestra. you have a very special kind of sound to approach. but at the end, it is very subjective, because i am sure tobin at his time, he had an orchestra of under 50 knew sixes, musicians for him, you know .. i can imagine, by mozart saying to his father, father, i am so happy, because i have an orchestra of 40 violins. i have eight flutes. i have 14 double basses, and when you play it, when you approach mozart you approach mozart with a small orchestra. >> rose: yes. >> you know how subjective is that, you know, how he was happy, and how sometimes you try to be, oh, my god, no, i cannot go like that because this will not -- the element of the sound that we have to build, but that is an amazing thing of music, the subjective point of music, how different it can b and in the moment that the composer put the notes there, it is still tobin, it is still mozart, but with the time, you are recreating that and it is still mozart but it is your idea, and the idea of the elements that you have in front, the okay strarks because also that is another thing, orchestras react differently, every orchestra and every orchestra has a different personality with the sound, with the commitment, with everything, so that is the world of the conductor, ho how to deal with that, because i cannot go to an orchestra and conduct in the same way that i do with the bolivar orchestra, it is impossible what i do with the los angeles philharmonic and go to vienna philharmonic you have to deal with the tradition, to respect what they have, and to bring your ideas and to have -- like it is a 50-50. >> rose: yes. >> but it means music can be defined by different conductors and different orchestras and that is part of the genius of it all, you can hear it in a different way, and at the same time what that composer has cone has to be so extraordinary that it lends itself to that, and maintains its original creative impulse. >> and even the most amazing thing that you can play two times the same composer, the same composer, the same orchestra, the same conductor, yoyou play it and then you playt is a second time and it is different. it is a little different. >> rose: even the next time night, programs. >> even the next night, even the same night, the same thing, same symphony, two times, it is as if it is the ability and, again, the power of the music to play with that, it is all subjective, because it is music, it is there, you have -- you have the paper there, the music, but how it can be, you have a million ways. >> rose: what is it that you want to be and accomplish over the next five years, say? >> it is to grow deeply and deeply in what we do. >> rose: beethoven you see five years ago may be different than the beethoven you see today? >> you cannot imagine how different i it can be, but wheni study and i see what i was doing, because i admire the score, i think, my god, how i was thinking that five years ago, i can be impressed sometimes, you know, for the reaction of what the music was giving to me at that time. but then when i have this cord here and i say, well, i didn't see this, maybe i will bring this, i think, oh, this is really difficult, it is going deeply and deeply and deeply, the development of the way to think about music, and of course, you know, sometimes people expect for you to be -- to have the knowledge and the experience possess a 50 or 60-year-old conductor, you know, sometimes people compare you with berson. >> it is impossible to compare, because they are masters, you know, and i am sure when they were young they were doing -- they were searching, they were, you know, thinking the way that they developed at the end, and it is fascinating, because what i see in five years in my life, i see my life conducting, and trying to understand what i am doing now, and what i will do at that time more deeply. >> rose: daniel birnbaum was a mentor, samuel was a mentor, they give you what? >> >> well, they are all different, you know, of course, my main mentor is sebraio, he is my maestro, my teacher, and i learn everything, the structure, the basis of what i am now, you know, what i do with music, he has an amazing brain. >> rose: yes, he does. >> incredible way to think, because never, never you do something and never is not a question there. >> rose: yes. >> why did you do that? gustavo-ito. >> rose: why did you do that? >> why did you do that? >> well, maestro -- no that is not the answer, the answer is this, because of this element. his brain structure, everything, and that is why he do what he does, you know. he can conduct an opera, and then he can play a concert, piano concerto and do a conference. he is a special brain. simon ratel, he is a fire. >> rose: a fire? >> fire. amazing. and i am not saying that simon is -- but the soul of simon and the power in his energy. another one that has been very important for me claudio bardo. >> rose: oh, really. >> and he is a magician. his hands and his way to conduct, the simplicity and at the same time the beauty of his hands. so really, i am really thankful to life, you know,. >> rose: the cover of musical america worldwide, gustavo dudamel, musician of the year and this is a cd, remember those? gustavo dudamel, discoveries. continued success, you are a gift for all of us and i thank you. >> it is a big honor, thank you very much. a huge honor. thank you. >> rose: david birp is here, a musician, author and artist, a successful career with the talking heads and then as a solo artist. he appeared on the cover of time magazine in 1986, which called him rock's renaissance man, and then there was the concert film, stop making sense. here is a look at some recent work. ♪ >> rose: how music works is his latest book, he takes on everything from the disruptive effect of technology to the acoustics of punching music venues, i am pleased to have him back on this program. welcome. >> good to be back here. >> rose: so tell me what this is. >> i mean it is part memoir. >> a bit of memoir stuff, not a lot but a little bit, it is mainly about music, how the context of music finds itself in, affects what the music turns out to be. >> rose: what do you mean by context? >> there is a lot of them. >> right. >> okay. and i didn't set out to write that, i started writing some essays and things and i realized, wow, this is what it is about that it could be the stage, performing on a stage, the fact that you have to do something live performing in front of other people and it could be the acoustics of the live venue, whether it is reverb brandt space like a cathedral r a little club in nashville .. it could be the finances of trying to be a musician, trying to be a composer and make a little of it and that narrows down and defines what you can reasonably do. you can have the same ambitions but they are going t going to k- they are going to get narrowed down at some point and you may keep those ambitions and achieve them some day, but there is going to be other factors that guide you, there is how you learned, how you learned music. >> rose: let me start with this idea you talk about the creative myth. right? >> uh-huh. >> rose: tell me about that. >> well, there is a very popular and very attractive idea that has been around for a very long time that composers, musicians artists in general that we have something very emotional. >> rose: right. >> that we have to get off our chests and that's where creativity comes from, that it is something that we just pours out and whatever, jack carowak's scroll just starts typing. >> rose: you are here to telling tell us that is a myth. >> yes. i am here to say it is not entirely a myth but there are so many other factors that affect what comes out in the end, whether it is financial or where the venue it is going to be presented in, what form it is going to take who your audience is, all these other things, you internalize them and that shapes what you make, it may not shape the emotion of what you make but it shapes a form of it, how long it is, what it sounds like. when you. >> rose: when you look at creating music, what is hard and easy about it for you? >> i have been doing it for a while so in a way i feel like i know how to do it and in a way that is a hindrance, there is a temptation to fall back on what you know. >> words are, for me the hardest part, the words are the hardest part. >> rose: the music -- >> because they pin it down, the music itself, just the melodies and the rhythms and all of the other stuff, they have this lovely ambiguity, that allows me and the audience and listener to find a way in, because it is not too specific but as soon as you start putting words in there, you are starting to chip away at that ambiguity and make it very specific, which if you do it well, it works great, but if you don't, you kind of kept people out. >> rose: when you created talking heads, what did you have in mind? >> i think there were a couple of things going on, one, i personally, i was very, very, very shy person and, it was getting up on stage, i had done it before like a folk singer or whatever and i realized i can communicate this way, i can do this. >> rose: you had a gift? >> i thought, yeah, doing this, i can communicate this way, but i also felt at that point and i think probably a lot of artists musicians feel this, we wanted to over throw whatever the reigning order of music was at that time. not violently we just thought, what is successful now most of it doesn't mean anything to us, we have to make our own music, we have to make music for our generation and our friends. >> rose: right. >> and it is not going -- we are going to wipe the slate clean and start from scratch. >> you were reacting against what? >> it was rock dinosaurs, a lot of them, in retrospect i actually like their music, but acts that were playing the madison square garden and on tv or who were doing huge expensive tours and all of this kind of thing. >> rose: this was what year. >> this was the mid seventies, mid seventies, 74, 75, 76, right around there. >> rose: and you wanted to create something that was different. >> >> but at the time there was a bit of anger in there, there is a bit of anger saying, you know, these people are not speaking to us, they are not speaking to our world, to our realities, to the lives as we live our lives. they are living in some fantasy land. >> rose: at least these are words that come to mind about your music, minimalist. does that fit for you? >> it is not really anymore, but yes, yes, definitely. >> rose: at the time it was created. >> very much. >> rose: intellectual? >> probably, yeah. >> rose: what else? >> wow. let me address those things. minimal, yes as i said we kind of stripped everything down to let's have the bare, the barest part of instruments play parts that are stripped down as much as possible, just the essence of what a song can be and no more. and then gradually we can accept the things in and add stuff to it. mix things in and add stuff to it. intellectual, that, i think, was not meant as a compliment. >> rose: yeah. >> i think in the context of a rock band, that was meant as a criticism, so i kind of like bristle and feel, like, oh, that means -- that is something they don't like, actually. >> rose: yeah. >> but i also felt like a lot of rock music was intentionally preventing to be more -- less intelligent than the composers actually were and i thought let's be honest, let's be honest and try to talk about who we really are. >> rose: who we are. >> yeah. >> rose: when did you move away from that? >> early mid eighties. >> gradually, the experience of living and growing and doing and wanting to create new? >> gradually added more musicians to the live band and more parts to the recordings and i realized that it wasn't just more. i mean, adding more people, more parts. it wasn't just making it bigger, it made it into a completely different thing. it made the music about something else. as a result i had to write hercally about other things, it was no longer stripped down to where it was just like my angst and my personality. it had to be something about -- it was a community when it became more musicians. was it affected by the market? >> >> oh, yes, yes, yes. >> rose: that's in here. >> yes. >> at that time we were on an upper trajectory so we could afford to add these extra musicians later on and that lasted for quite a while. by maybe the mid nineties, a decade or so later, i had to strip it back down. >> rose: because the market changed? >> th the market changed and i would justify it by saying, which was probably one of the big incentives for me to do it, but i could justify it by saying it is time to make a musical change too, but -- so -- >> rose: time to change to change creativity and time to change because the market had changed? >> i think so. >> rose: was there a golden age for you? at that. >> rose: for. >> for me, no, but there probably was, depending on the generation, the age of the music fans, yes, the music you heard in music in high school and college, whatever that happened to be probably has a deeper effect on him. >> rose: what is interesting today in some of these bands i know and provided you will see a variety of age groups now, i mean, children come to hear the same thing some of the same things or artists that their parents did. >> i find that with my audience as well and i am going to say very flattering, it is very flattering, whatever a 13-year-old kid is logic listening to one of my records or something. >> because his parents introduced -- >> sometimes, but sometimes they are out there on their own. >> sometimes they find it on their own and that is really flattering. >> rose: talk about the distribution. because i mean you have six models of distribution. >> there are probably more and i am talking about how music gets from the makers to the public, and there is probably more, there is probably a spectrum, and it goes from what is called 360-degree deal which basically means the artist signs for everything, for the t-shirts for the live concerts and the records and then goes to the other side where the artist is kind of doing everything for themselves, they are selling out of their own web site, they are booking their own concerts, they are driving to the gigs in a van and everything inbetween, so there is, there are more options there are more choices that than there used to be. >> rose: because there is opportunities to find more distribution channels. >> yes. >> more options that way, you can decide i am ready to give up ownership of myself because i want the finances that will give me. >> rose: so i can focus on things and not the business side. >> and the opposite as well. it doesn't mean musicians or the music business is doing great but at the moment there are quite a few choices. >> rose: are you happy about the digital revolution as it affects music? >> the technology -- >> rose: take what you have? >> well, it is technology is great, but in recent days and recent weeks i have been thinking to myself, th to the internet isn't always good, all of this whole world that we live in now, i have to step back for a minute sometimes and go, without being a ludite and say not everything this brings us is good. >> rose: what is not good? >> there is a sense -- well, everybody knows there is a sense when people just spend their time with the face in the gadgets. >> rose: right. >> there is a sense where relationships, whether it is what you consider friends or other relationships, they -- they are kind of whittled down to being like little sound bites and 125 words or whatever, and that is a relationship, that is not a relationship, that is not relating to another human being. >> rose: exactly right. do you think there will be a day in which concerts will be a relic, big concerts? >> no, i don't think so. >> rose: people will always want to go and listen to music with other people? >> yes, i think part of it is the music but a huge part of it is being together with other people, people who all like the same thing. >> rose: you wrote this, throughout the history of recorded music we valued disreens over quality every time, convenience over quality every time. >> well, doesn't it sounds good? >> i think it is true. it is not entirely bad, i mean, when people who value kind of a beautifully recorded symphony or a band or whatever it is, it sounds terrible, but i realize as a teenager, when i first heard pop music and kind of shocked me and excited me it was over a little transit sorry radio that probably sounded worse than listening to music on your phone now,. >> rose: i would as assume much worse. >> and it changed my world. >> rose: and it doesn't have to be perfect. >> it doesn't have to be perfect and it is nice if it sounds better if you have that option but it doesn't have to be. >> rose: yes. and you can find something in there that. >> it is like television in a sense it doesn't have to be perfectly produced, if it adds excellence it has something that is really something interesting going on. >> it just pulls you in. >> rose: yes, exactly. >> you can watch it on your phone. >> rose: and if it has a strength and eloquence at its core -- >> it doesn't really matter. >> it is a question, though in terms of television and i assume in terms of music would you rather go into a recording session or go to a concert to perform? what? >> recording to me is the hardest part because it kind of pins it down. i enjoy the composing, the writing, the figuring out parts with the other musicians and the performing, because most of -- both of those leave a little bit of possibility. with a recording it is fixed, it is fine, i like it but if i had to write those three things -- >> rose: who do you want to read this book? other than many people? >> i am hoping that it goes beyond people -- >> rose: the hard-core who need it? >> and those people who know who i am. and hopefully people who don't know my music, don't care about my music, but they might, somebody might tell them that, hey this -- there is a way of looking at how music works that is in here, that deals with whatever music you like. >> rose: the, my theory is the more you understand about something the more interesting it becomes, the more complexity. >> yes and you are finding the argument that says if you take it apart you are going to ruin the experience. >> rose: yes. >> and the counter argument is well you can learn how to fix your car but that doesn't spoil the enjoyment of the ride. >> rose: who speaks to you this writing about music? >> well, i have. >> rose: and you have read i lot, i understand. >> i have read a lot of -- >> rose: you write es says? >> yes. .. i met a woman who wrote the great animal orchestra about the sounds animals make in the environment, and he broke it down and said, look, in an environment that remains stable, insects take this frequency bandwidth and the mammals are kind of here, and the monkeys or whatever are here, the birds are in here. they have it worked out and as if it is lines of music and all playing their parts and they don't intrude on the others. >> rose: yes. >> and it was kind of a huge insight and i thought that is absolutely right. yeah. >> rose: tell me about the role of brian eno. >> he is -- he was instrumental in kind of pushing talking heads as a band. >> rose: right. >> beyond what we were used to doing. and then he and i worked together as collaborators, as collaborators before. he is not entirely but to some extent he is a nonmusician, he actually can play an instrument but he prefers to think of himself as a nonmusician so he prefers to work and think of how the music is organized as opposed to sitting and jamming with somebody. >> you are now collaborating with annie clark. >> yes. >> rose: how is that going? >> it has been going really well it has been going really well. we did a record and we have been doing performances where we have a fairly large brass section and that became the core of the band, and that was a choice we made, that was a limit we made and then we put together these songs based on that and worked out great, it is a great sound. >> rose: do rock stars have a special place in the paragon of celebrity worship? >> there is the most in someone's career where it seems like everything comes together, they have written some incredible songs and they are a great damageser and great on stage, whatever, everything seems to be happening and then, you know, as you see, well, they are fallible, a couple of years later they do something horrible. >> rose: right. >> and you go, yes but, okay, so like you take them off the pedestal but still respect the moment when they did this genius stuff, and you go, that really was genius and you can't deny that. >> rose: and they will always have that. >> yes, yes. >> rose: la times, the keen cultural observer from music to films to art to the internet to books, david byrne has become a public intellectual, do you like the sound of that? >> that is meant to be flattering. >> rose: yes, it is. >> times have changed. >> rose: you always want people when they write something like that, also i am an entertainer. that's also want i do. >> yes, yes, it is meant to be fun and entertaining as well. >> rose: an and i want a lot of people the buy this book. not just to say it is intellectual or good, i want them to buy it. all of that. >> >> thank you. >> rose: thank you very much. funding for charlie rose has been provided by the coca-cola company, supporting this program since 2002. and american express. additional funding provided by these funders. and by bloomberg. a provider of multimedia news and information services worldwide. captioning sponsored by rose communication >> this is n.b.r. >> susie: good evening everyone. i'm susie gharib. the unemployment rate drops to a four year low as u.s. businesses add 146,000 jobs in november. we look behind the numbers. >> tom: i'm tom hudson. we meet the c.e.o.'s of three small businesses hiring right now. what they do and why they're looking for help. >> susie: and house speaker boehner accuses president obama of wasting another week in the fiscal cliff negotiations. >> tom: that and more tonight on
Search Results 0 to 37 of about 38 (some duplicates have been removed)